I’m perpetually astonished by the originality and talent of Flickr users. See, for example, this.
Thanks to Brian for the link.
Monthly Archives: August 2006
The memory man
Following a link about something else, I came on this piece about Gordon Bell’s MyLifeBits project…
Gordon Bell doesn’t need to remember, but has no chance of forgetting. At the age of 71, he is recording as much of his life as modern technology will allow, storing it all on a vast database: a digital facsimile of a life lived.
If he goes for a walk, a miniature camera that dangles from his neck snaps pictures every minute or so, immediately committing the scene to a memory built not of neurons but ones and noughts. If he wanders into a cafe, sensors note the change in light, the shift of temperature and squirrel the information away. Conversations are recorded and steps logged thanks to a GPS receiver carried with him.
Dr Bell has now stored so much of his life on computer that he is in danger of forgetting how to remember. “I look at it as a surrogate memory,” he says. If he wants to recall something, he switches on and picks his way through days and months of information until he finds what he is after. It was all dreamt up at Microsoft’s Bay Area Research Centre in San Francisco, where Dr Bell works…
Thanks to Wesley Bradley of Activate Design for spotting the broken link to Gordon Bell.
YouTube stats
From Technology Review…
YouTube is the one of the most popular video-sharing sites where amateurs and professionals alike can share and view videos — of a recent trip, of a new dog or even of themselves burping.
According to comScore Media Metrix, YouTube had 16 million unique U.S. visitors in July, a 20 percent increase from 13 million in June. The site did not even have measurable traffic until August 2005, when it had 58,000 unique visitors.
For July, YouTube debuted in the Top 50 at No. 40, up from 58th in June.ComScore also recorded a doubling of traffic to News Corp.-owned MySpace.com’s video site, with 20 million visitors, trailing only Yahoo Inc.’s video site, which had 21 million.
“Consumers clearly view video as one of the most accessible, interesting and entertaining sources of content on the Web,” said Jack Flanagan, executive vice president of comScore Media Metrix. ”The trends we’re witnessing indicate that online video is emerging from its infancy and entering the mainstream.”
CBS to stream prime-time shows
From Technology Review…
LOS ANGELES (AP) — CBS Television will begin showing episodes of several new and returning prime-time shows for free on the Internet, becoming the second network to do so.
The unit of CBS Corp. already sells downloads of episodes on Apple Computer Inc.’s iTunes Music Store and Google Inc.’s video store. In May, it launched an advertising-supported online channel called ”innertube” to stream programming created just for the Web.
The network said Tuesday that starting next month it will begin streaming episodes of a new show, ”Jericho,” as well as returning shows ”CSI: Crime Scene Investigation,” ”CSI: Miami,” ”CSI: NY,” ”NCIS,” ”Numbers” and ”Survivor.”The shows will contain fewer ads than when they are shown on TV. The ads also will be shorter _ typically 15 second to 30 seconds — and cannot be skipped, CBS said.The shows will become available the day after they appear on TV. Episodes of ”Jericho” and ”Survivor” will remain available online for the entire season, while episodes of the other shows will be online for four weeks following their initial airing.”
Making our new and returning prime-time series available to our viewers is the next step in innertube’s programming evolution,” Larry Kramer, president of CBS Digital Media, said in a statement.ABC began showing episodes of four prime-time shows, including ”Lost” and ”Desperate Housewives” for free online in May. The network was the first to sell episodes on iTunes last October.
ABC recently hailed the success of its later effort, saying that in May and June, the network’s site showed 16 million video streams. The network is expected to expand its online offerings in the fall.
Travelling light (contd.)
Hmmm… The ‘security’ hysteria gathers pace. This from an item in the Huffington Post…
U.S. authorities are advising women not to wear gel bras on airplanes as information developed in the foiled London plot points to an expanding role for women in smuggling explosives on to an aircraft.
So, no transatlantic flights for breast-cancer patients who have had mastectomies, then?
Extra-terrestrials prefer Firefox!
Well, you could hardly expect sophisticated aliens to use Microsoft software, could you?
Alas, this is just a neat project by some Oregon State University Linux group. Report on how they did it here. They got the farmer’s permission too.
John Godley
John Godley, aka Lord Kilbracken, an engaging Irish peer who renounced his British citizenship after Bloody Sunday, has died at the age of 85. He was a war hero (he had a DFC, among other decorations) who, in 1972, returned his war medals to the Queen in protest at the British policy of internment in Northern Ireland. There’s a lovely obit in today’s Guardian which captures something of his individuality and astonishing life. The Times obit is also good.
One of my memories of him comes from an intervention he made in a surreal debate in the House of Lords in 1995 about the ‘Historic Monuments and Archaeological Objects (Northern Ireland) Order 1995’. The relevant passage from Hansard goes like this:
Lord Williams of Mostyn: We welcome the thrust of the order and its purpose. In the 10 minutes or so that we had to pass before beginning this business I turned my eye to Article 42 which makes it a criminal offence for any person who finds an archaeological object not to report it to the relevant authorities, and a separate and distinct criminal offence to be in possession of, or retain possession of, such an object. All agog, I wished to satisfy myself as to the definition of an “archaeological object”. Article 2(2) states that archaeological object,
“includes any object, being a chattel … manufactured or unmanufactured … which is, or appears to be, of archaeological or historical interest and which has, by reason of such interest, a value greater than its intrinsic value”.
As a lawyer I am happy to say that that will cause endless problems in court in the future.
I considered a possible example. In, say, five years’ time, after the next election, the Minister, alas, will no longer be occupying her present situation. If in the next year or so she goes, as she regularly does, to Ballymena, Craigavon or Dungannon and happens to discard a pair of ministerial wellington boots which happen thereafter to be ploughed over and if, subsequently, I happen to discover those ministerial, monogrammed wellington boots, they will have an intrinsic value of about 75p, I suppose, while the value of the materials of which they are composed will be about 50p. However, their historic value (by virtue of their connection with the revered Minister) will be significantly greater than either 75p or 50p. It will probably be in the region of £2.50 plus VAT.
According to the definition I have quoted, that would make them—absurdly, but perhaps understandably—an archaeological object, the possession, or non-reporting of possession, of which would render me liable to prosecution and condign punishment in the magistrates’ court or equivalent. Can that be right? Other than that helpful question, I have nothing further to add.
Lord Kilbracken: My Lords, perhaps I might rise for a moment to refer to the point made by my noble friend on the Front Bench regarding the Minister’s boots. As I understand it, the regulations only apply to objects of archaeological interest. Though I feel sure that such boots may be objects of sentimental interest, particularly to the noble Baroness, can they truly be said to be of archaeological interest?
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, I am obliged to my noble friend. In fact the order refers to articles not only of archaeological interest, but also of historical interest. It was the latter adjective upon which I was focusing my attention.
Iraqi quagmire explained
Quote of the day – 2
If I had a nickel for every million dollar idea I’ve had, I’d be rich by now!
David Weinberger, writing in his Blog.
Our cognitive bias against openness
Lovely FT column by James Boyle. Sample:
Studying intellectual property and the internet has convinced me that we have another cognitive bias. Call it the openness aversion. We are likely to undervalue the importance, viability and productive power of open systems, open networks and non-proprietary production.
Test yourself on the following questions. In each case, it is 1991 and I have removed from you all knowledge of the past 15 years.
You have to design a global computer network. One group of scientists describes a system that is fundamentally open – open protocols and systems so anyone could connect to it and offer information or products to the world. Another group – scholars, businessmen, bureaucrats – points out the problems. Anyone could connect to it. They could do anything. There would be porn, piracy, viruses and spam. Terrorists could put up videos glorifying themselves. Your activist neighbour could compete with The New York Times in documenting the Iraq war. Better to have a well-managed system, in which official approval is required to put up a site; where only a few actions are permitted; where most of us are merely recipients of information; where spam, viruses, piracy (and innovation and anonymous speech) are impossible. Which would you have picked?
Set yourself the task of producing the greatest reference work the world has ever seen. It must cover everything from the best Thai food in Raleigh to the annual rice production of Thailand, the best places to see blue whales to the history of the Blue Dog Coalition. Would you create a massive organisation of paid experts with layers of editors producing tomes that are controlled by copyright and trademark? Or would you wait for hobbyists, scientists and volunteer encyclopedists to produce, and search engines to organise, a cornucopia of information? I know which way I would have bet in 1991. But I also know that the last time I consulted an encyclopedia was in 1998….