the art of writing is discovering what you believe
Because it pleaseth me to do so (and because I’m avoiding work like mad), I’ve been tinkering with the aerial map of London that David found via the Evening Standard.
Interesting. It strikes me as possibly useful for learning more about geography and in this case, population density and resource usage.
The Underground Map and Minard’s famous Carte Figurative of the French Army’s disaster in Russia in the war of 1812 are alike in important respects: both are brilliant, and neither travels well. The Underground Map and Napoleon’s March are perfectly attuned to their particular data, so focused on their data sets. They do not serve, then, as good practical generic architectures for design; indeed, revisions and knock-offs have uniformly been corruptions or parodies of the originals. Both, however, exemplify the deep principles of information design in operation, as well as the craft and passion behind great information displays.
discovered via rogue semiotics
Not so much a review as an appreciation . . . . while I’m not a big fan of science fiction, this one for some reason seems to transcend what I remember of the genre.
Shockwave Rider (sorry, no cover art available)
I read this book in high school not long after it came out and remembered it vaguely but positively. For some reason, it’s themes of ubiquitous data networking and worms (phages in the book) surfaced in my head a week or so ago and I dug a copy out of the library. It was better than I remembered and surprisingly prescient. Most of the reviews I read on Amazon talk about the eerie predictions of a worldwide data network (called the data-net) and how people are increasingly rootless in the physical and plugged into the virtual.
While that’s interesting — he gets a lot of it right, 20 years before most of us were exposed to the Internet — what I found more compelling is the central conflict of the book, the clash between the oligarchy that controls information and uses it against the rest of the world and one man, a renegade systems guru who was schooled in the oligarchy’s thinktanks but fell out with their philosophy.
While those in power throw money and human capital at the task of manufacturing wisdom (without actually understanding it), all the while manipulating the rest of the world’s perceptions and opinions, the hero devises a way of unleashing all the stored information that props up those in power. From detailed accountings of government corruption — with check numbers — to precise ingredient lists of tainted foods, everything everyone could wish to know about everything is available on ubiquitous public data terminals.
One of the related themes is how easily fooled those in power are by what looks like official information: if it comes off the net, it must be accurate. They lack the common sense — or wisdom — to question what they read and the book’s hero uses that against them again and again.
It’s the old theme of empowerment vs control, a well-used idea in speculative fiction, especially of the dystopian school (Brave New World, 1984, et al). But at the same time, it touches on the choices people make, how they live, and the fruits of those choices. Do we live our lives or the ones we’re told to live by advertisers and other models of behavior?
And any book that has a job title of “systems rationalizer,” truncated to “systems rash,” is worth a read.
Ten Technologies That Deserve to Die
Some technologies, however, are so blatantly obnoxious that the human race would rejoice if they were obliterated. A wise society would honor its young technical innovators for services rendered in annihilating obsolete technologies that are the dangerous hangovers of previous, less advanced generations.
Found in rebecca’s pocket.
EFF: Trusted Computing: Promise and Risk
Long but worth reading.
We recognize that hardware enhancements might be one way to improve computer security. But treating computer owners as adversaries is not progress in computer security. The interoperability, competition, owner control, and similar problems inherent in the TCG and NCSCB approach are serious enough that we recommend against adoption of these trusted computing technologies until these problems have been addressed. Fortunately, we believe these problems are not insurmountable, and we look forward to working with the industry to resolve them.
Recently I have occasion to have a couple of people tell me why they “hate the Mac.”
1. “The mouse only has one button.”
This, from one of the tech support staff, the kind who might be expected to know about computers in general. So I showed him that a. the second mouse button works just fine, even in Apple’s applications (like the Finder) and b. that even the scroll wheel works. The real beef is that Apple only *sells* one button mice, not that they don’t support them. Mine is still in the shrinkwrap is came in.
Same guy told me he found UNIX/Linux limiting, but come to find out he’s never really used either. He also bragged that he had $3000 to spend on whatever system he wanted and was proud that he didn’t buy a PowerBook, choosing instead a Dell.
2. “You have to drag the CD icon to the Trash can to eject it.”
OK, fair enough. But not for about two and a half years, if you’re an OS X user. Same user tells me she can eject a mounted disk by pushing the button and ejecting the media: as far as I know, that’s a sure way to confuse *any* operating system. I didn’t bother to ask if it was equally annoying to remind Windows that you just shoved a floppy or CD into its guts and would it please now acknowledge the fact?
There are people who find Windows more productive, but I generally find their work is pretty narrowly defined. I never get jobs like that: even my current indenture is too broad for Windows to encompass. Essentially, a networked typing station would suffice for most people.