ManyMedia

In a 5-0 vote yesterday, the FCC moved to double the amount of spectrum
dedicated to first responder communication. Instead of the “slivers” of
unconnected bandwidth allowed under existing regulations, the larger chunk
of airwaves permit a wider range of broadband applications, such as video.
“The big lesson of September 11 was you have all of these people showing up
at a spot because of a national disaster and their devices couldn’t
communicate,” said FCC wireless chief John Muletta. The new rules would also
enable firemen to use helmet-mounted cameras to broadcast live feeds while
downloading building floor plans to a handheld device to find and rescue
people trapped in burning buildings, among other uses. It is not clear
whether less-funded public safety agencies could afford such high-tech
gadgets, though the hope is that they can use existing wireless devices.

Uncategorized

Planning Social Infrastructure for MMOG Rekonstruction. Rekonstruction: not about other games, it’s a specific game. No shards (duplicate servers), one world (earth), population goals (no architected limit, global reach), specific releases to locals. Social infrastructure: everything, humans find infrastruture where they can. Killing is “talking” with you. (Chat can be useful.) Who plays? builders, interactors, gamers/levelers (and overlappers). Gamers: mechanisms (rankings, levelings, guilds). Builders (houses/castles, earth moving; example: ActiveWorlds/Muse3d/there.com, plop houses). Interactors (guilds, clans, relationships, chat, communications; there, sims online). Who do we want as players? gamers #1 (understand them best, know where to find them), interactors not primary focus. Finance: w/out funds, success, popularity, we can’t do niche games later on. Consequences online: death isn’t real, shame is handleable (delete character). Escapism w/out consequences? not without, not with too many. from developer perspective: scripting/macroing, mapping (outside defined perameters) might screw things up. from player’s seat: moral considerations, real world fraud. Behavior mods: account suspension, character delision, account deletion (coarse results, but what else is there?) PK (player killing) and NPKs: single world, PKs can’t kill nonPKs and vice versa, sub-groups of each major category (gamers more likely to be PKs), seek equity in who advances and how. Migration between K status possible. Q: reincarnation and death management? Death is really hard to do in these games. (game is skill- and attribute-based, implies not having twitch-combat). Q: other bases other than PK/nonPK? Would like options, but won’t be ready for launch. If you’re too new in this business, you won’t sell as much. Intimidation issues (how to be a jerk): personal blocking (surrounding), building blocking (move earth, combat damage the terrain), vehicle attack, avalanche (people are creative about this kind of interaction). Intermixing PK/nons: technology (save zones like cities and transport, shield generators). Guilds: user defined (experience sharing, hierarchies), one guild to a character? (spies, traitors) Must allow betrayal to have real social interaction (must not impact game quality, currency management, inventory, escrow). Economies: network is vital to social stability, economists and finance consultancies to help design, balance is important (hard to get this right). Markets/vendors: once economies mature, vendor modes for players set pricing on in-game common crafted items (until trade network is set up). Why earth is a bad idea: reality (suspending disbelief), immediately meaningful geography. Makes easier to blur lines: communications (barriers in and out chat, distance mixing is tricky), emots/tells (vital), game economies: auctions, character markets, escrow as profit center (trades allowed w/out escrow, user problem). Chat: IRC for external views, don’t reinvent stuff (IM, SMS, email gateways), emotes affect avatars. XML for outgoing data. Incoming: still working on that.

Uncategorized

Shit. I had an awsome blog of all the things David said and in a moment of “two big guys with their knees imposing on my personal space,” combined with my external mouse which needed to be swung around to point and post, and timing of it all… the entirety was erased in a passing blip of the mouse on that damned X box in the upper right corner of my window.

It’s all about context. It’s always been about context.

Uncategorized

Social Software: why people can’t relate to politics: didn’t know where to start, wouldn’t have an affect on their own. BBC moving toward facilitating conversations. Started by studying a small group with distinct single focus, find crusaders, work with first-timers. Process: looked at people in their environments (same gates, obstacles, opportunities, roadblocks), create 5-stage development model as knowledge structure (slides not working) to triangulate in on issue, quick response to feedback: location of issue, organization of parties, multiple ways in. 2nd stage: deciding whether to campaign or not. Diff between emerging technologies and emerging applications. Here, it’s about applying simple tech to real life. 1. Discovering, 2 Deciding if they want to commit a huge part of their life to change something. What’s the cost? What feedback do they need? 3. Iterative: researching, organizing, strategizing, recruiting; 3/4. acting/planning. 5. three main choices: campaign, change the world, stall or drop off.

Discovering: awareness, learning, developing concern: civic info (how-to, resources, need to change and how things work). Using all BBC media for hooks in. Q: imposing BBC’s bias? MJ: no, trying to be as fair and balanced, people identify their own problems. Mechanisms: local notice board, testing water w/ simplified prods, search for people locally w/ same concerns, start conversations (Terry Winograd and Fernando Flores: their envt was too structured), “shipbuilding” (not like a place where people hang out).

Planning: compiling folder of useful info and related issues, email journal, feeds and links; focus on task not membership. Tools with hooks to databases and resources to support group routines and technology. Moderation, call an editor, peer review.

Acting: folder goes live, groups in other areas discover work and links, support develops, broadcast media coverage possible. Retiring, use of Creative Commons license to publishers, make people mentors (A virtuous circle).

Different tools for different scales of activity: dialog/conversation, buddy list/circle of friends, communities of interest, strangers in the aggregate. Graph w/ small number of people interested in large number of interests, etc. Local action groups. Personality considerations (connectors, mavens, salespeople) mapped to tools (sales: initiatives, connectors: start pages, noticeboards, messaging, etc.) Pilot phase: Oct 2003. Lots of work required to make things simple. Some things won’t work at first, rapid iteration and improvement. Long way to go, can’t be simple enough (real world is complicated enough).

Q: BBC’s objective and fairness limits spectrum of debate. JC: who we’re not doing this on news, this is a distinct service. “This is not the BBC speaking.” Q; need for lots of handholding, how will you deal with this? JC: we don’t know yet. Need to work out how much work there is.

Uncategorized

Nanotech is next. Meanwhile, Cory says Gnutella was just held to be legal. Check boingboing.net–he says he just blogged it.

DNA 50th anniversary today, nature has efficient info storage, but we don’t have technology to read nano-data. What nano can be? if something exists, things like it are possible: biology, chemistry, mech engineering. Biology: molec machines exist, are precise, clean. Principles. Chem: wide range of structures as molecules and reactions: strong, tough, circuit-carrying. Mechanical engineering: motors, movement, controlled systems. Computer science: manipulation by threshholding (right, wrong), reliable and complex, precise, intricate. Molecular manufacturing: we’re molecular systems, modifications might be modular, inexpensive; powerful tech has downsides (gray goo, blowing dust), not done by accident. Military interested in fast, cheap, precise systems, might use to destablize global interests. Computing: Moore’s law, lower limit is that we’re half-way thru (we’re at 10^9, can go to 10^18). Health, wealth, warfare, future of computing. Where are we today? space technology is very cool (Buck Rogers), many people doing nano research don’t want their work tied to military and killing apps/ideas. Today’s administration needs reality check. Now, universal technologies can’t build more things like themselves. “We need things that can feed on themselves and spread (what?) to transform the world with amazing rapidity.” But not weapons systems. Future of digital systems is molecular, future of material world is digital. Q: also saying that we need DRM/DMCA? ED: right now it’s controlling, yes we’re going to need it, how to maximize liberty and flexibility. Q: blockage to obtaining this in next 50 yrs, harder to enforce DRM using this tech? Probably easier to defeat than to make machines. ED: major obstacles: we’re not yet able to design and fabricate on this level, essentially cultlural. Systems are complex, existing collaborations aren’t large enough to cover this task. Need scientists to work for engineers. Re: controlling tech post-development, as we get close to this, importance will emerge as to life/death options, potential for centralization and abuse of power is great. Q: in 20 years of talking, what have you changed your minds about? ED: breadth and honesty of scientists working under this bureaucracy (cultural). Q: funding and capital? ED: some seeking tax-based funding channel. Small science (funding future) has low budget, most productive long-term funding will be diverse, short-term apps, pay-as-you-go and small-scale research will develop base. Q: why digital? mechanical moving parts. Q; non-rival risk goods, where’s economy? constraints? ED: being discussed, see Center for Responsible Nano. Q: damage and structural mods problematic? ED: yes, Foresight Institute has published guidelines, biology has room for evolution. Q; best example of where progress has been made in tangible results? ED: next gen chips, but looking to new stuff, enabling tech; but noone’s tried very hard yet.

Uncategorized

Google, Innovation, and the Web. New info (not something Google has covered before) on process: ingredients: organize the world’s info and make it universally accessible and useful (mission stmt) (catalogs, news, all the info, google on web phones, the spell-check thing); do things that matter (and not be evil), relentless focus on the user (google labs), brilliant people have good ideas (depends on trust, they realize value, things that matter, keeping people matter), a creative environment helps. Use process that works: ideas come from everywhere (once filtered), map using google API (touchgraph google browser shows relationship between web pages), design for users (that people can use in effective way is tricky). Beta Google was very simple, hard to mess up. How to keep simple while functions get complex? (not answer) Compile, discuss, prioritize (project ideas on sparrow editable webpage, informal discussions, brainstorm and feedback to distinguish good from bad ideas. Map of wireless search traffic (spike last December, traffic curving up). Small teams are fast and agile (working on projects). Communication is key (200-300 staff means 100 small groups, special challenge to management as well as code). Tools to organize (internal search, launch forms, weekly reports, feedback. Evhead blog (speculation in press, but use is internal). Test, experiment, iterate. First user study was interpretable. labs.google.com again. Google is hiring. What makes this process work? all the bits: management, teams, technology; sharing ideas (APIs, product ideas and tracking tools), logs; staying true to your mission. Question: about Applied Semantics, could be applied elsewhere. CS: great things will come of it (can’t say more). Q as to filters for ideas: it’s not a democracy, there are gatekeepers. Q: is google better than napster for finding MP3s? CS: why we don’t have a music search, IP and legal problems, google respects intellectual property, won’t get in the face of rights holders. Fine line.

Uncategorized

Microsoft Web Services, universal app interconnectionn fabric, pervasive, many primative. Needs to be easy (lower barrier of entry). Challenge is to get it right, wide deployment, and interoperable; to get to where software talks to software. “Need more infrastructure. Loosely coupled business relationships mean that businesses will rely more on interconnectivity of data and apps.” (re: completely desparate systems, joint ventures). Average lifetime of S+P 500 company is decreasing in years. (It’s all about software at Microsoft.) Required capabilities: message-level security, routing, reliable messaging, transaction & business level. Need a set of design principles, designed for interopability and broad adoption, add infrastructure-loevel capabilities… design principles: modular and composable, general purpose, standards-based, federated (autonomous, independent). Need for interoperability: www.ws-i.org, an open-industry effort to enable across platforms, apps, and programming languages. (Lots of groups have signed on.) Baseline standards include XML 1.0, SOAP 1.1, WSDL 1.1, UDDI 2.0, HTTP 1.1. Question as to if MS was more willing to work with standards, Cabrera says yes, but a clean design is better than a committee design. (question as to GPL, Cabrera doesn’t know about this.) TCP/IP stack is complex, need to develop platform. Cabrera points out platform is in development to help standards committees… Interop is fundamental, help produce tools, partners w/ standards committees, committment to demonstrate interopability according to WS specs, will implement as part of .NET framework; also demos w/ partners to show interoperability. Server 2003, WSE will allow faster release of platforms than between Server 2000 and 2003. Question as to detailed layered specs affects hardware partners too (attesting to the pain of interop). From floor: Complexity comes from open group too, simple and elegant models still need asynchronous pattern. Q on how trust patterns get established. Infrastructure, policy, there is a roadmap: identity, authentication services, webs of trust, send a lot of messages to get it going, etc. Q on open source standards and how .NET will implement interoperability: protocol stacks, not test suits. Cabrera says they’re complex (because it’s a complicated subject), not because they’re trying to be hard to work with. Problem is in semantics, not messaging suites. C says that’s why they’ll have test suites. Huge challenge, many people committed, we’re building the future, want and need feedback. Editorial comment: why doesn’t this make me feel comfortable at all?

Uncategorized

ICT = I… communication technology. Pervasive, not more powerful. Moore’s law: developing nations want $100 pc for a decade, but we’re not much closer to that goal. Industry is selling to only 10%, ignoring 90% of world. “Half the world has never made a phone call” (made in ’94) is really not true today; opportunities to leapfrog, rather than catch up–new tech is cheaper to deploy, superior to old solutions; go straight to cellular. (Cost of infrastructure: no copper; flexible infrastructure). Somebody’s making money (MTN, African cellular) Why telephony has been successful? 1. met enormous local need. 2. repurposes technology (luxury in developed world, essential and replacement in developing world). 3. innovative business models (pay as you go, pay per call, receive-only service, etc. Note: no street addresses, must do pay-as-you-go.) Testing the Grameen phone in Bangladesh: works–30K people making a living offering tele service. (see 1, 2, 3 above). Success story: Ghana, business-focused NSP. Ghana’s phone service is terrible, no ISP over phones, Sawa uses radio & custom-made Linux router, parabolic antennas, wifi; now growing interest in VoIP (currently not legal). Another success story: Voxiva (Peru), huge need to track spread of epidemics. Gives dial-in number w/ voice hierarchy to track illnesses. Microlending system: call in for your balance (works better than his bank). Biggest customer now is DOD tracking smallpox vaccination reactions. Voice is critical in developing world, interactive voice systems work well. Limited success: Simputer: gets around literacy problems, deals w/ commerce and other common tools; is linux-based and entirely compatible w/ development community. Still being sold in development kits, but concerns about long-term availability of CPU (chip that hardware based on is getting harder to find). Telecenters (don’t work): owners not entirely happy w/ how they’re being used (porn). How is the net going to make people money? Same uses as developed world, no repurposing, telecenters with creative biz models have survived. Bridge builders: people with feet in two different worlds. Question: how do we create more of these people? Diaspora: smart people leave developing nations, get jobs, learn and leave. When they return, they bring skills, capital, contacts. When people don’t come back, only brain drain. Ethan says: put geeks on airplanes. Goals: complete IT projects (like GACACA genocide database), transfer skills, develop local IT capacity. Unstated goals: create converters who advocate IP development w/in companies, orgs, univs; build ties for future collaborations. Dangers: expensive, exclusionary and hard to scale. Other models: UNITeS/NetAid (virtual volunteering: unites.org) and Techcorps (techcorps.org) — problems include motivation, cross-cultural issues, time prioritization. ThinkCycle (thinkcycle.org) to collaborate students and Indian health workers to deal with dysentery victims; solved academic motivation & medical problems. Bridge building: Code for International Development (especially open code), global tech books (like O’Reilly), certification (to demonstrate technical competency, making programs meaningful. Three good reasons to get interested: money (Cisco’s Net Academy investment = $50M, developing the next market); opportunity to experiment (Dewayne Hendricks and others), “the next big thing” (changing paradigm for developing software, create jobs, human co-processing for hard AI problems, OCR, other tasks where humans are still better than computers. (geekcorps.org and cyber.law.harvard.edu)

Uncategorized

Houston, we have a problem. I went into see the Chandler demo, but there was less than no room. Then I went in to hear Meg, but again no room. I didn’t see anyone in particular blogging Chandler, but Cory is blogging Meg (to be posted shortly), who’s still carrying on (after I got crowded out). The next one starts soon.

Uncategorized

A panel w/ Xeni, Doc, Dave Sifry, Dan Gillmor, and BBC guy by phone Stuart Hughes.

Blogging is personal, about the original audience; if others get something out of it, great. Xeni: other sites of note? Doc: community called warbloggers (Glenn reynolds et al), now war/peace-blogging. Stuart noted hits from Guardian article, got linked/lumped in with others. Sifry: level of discourse on war ebbs/flows, social communities form around thought leaders, became clearly a political statement. generated clear response from left. It’s not so much about the war, it’s about people finding a voice, using personal publishing tools, causing a rebirth in civics. Doc: rolling agreement, “here’s my understanding” like ussclueless, glenn; is remarkably responsible. Doc’s blog isn’t political, others about war: it’s about that and nothing else. Sometimes what you don’t know is held against you. Not a right/left thing, its more for or against the war. Technorati: people point to what they respect, thoughtful parts of conversations. Xeni: when CNN asked Kevin to shut down his blog, interest mushroomed. Stuart: will the BBC find out about this? not intended for wider consumption, didn’t consult bosses first. By time it came to wider attention, accident happened. BBC was open-minded about it, is using clips from his blog in a larger spread. Dave’s site onscreen: big database aggregator (15 min lag) of what’s going on, human collaborative filters: current events, popularity rankings, etc. Xeni: difference between blogging or journalism? Dan G, what did you learn? Doc: google news excludes blogs, complements technorati. Questions from audience, but I left.

Uncategorized