Computer Generated Art

est.

I love the idea of computer generated art, problem is that computers lack that subjectivity that determines what we judge to be ‘good’ or ‘bad’ art. That’s why using computers for what they are good at, processing millions of functions a second, alongside a person’s innate ability to ‘choose’ between two or more objects is a very interesting idea. Take del.icio.us popular, Amazon’s web services, Digg , YouTube etc etc. What rises to the top is generally considered ‘good’ the millions of less ‘good’ items remain languishing in the chaos. I have experimented with Genetic Algorithms to produce images for a while now, problem is that as each image is technically unique, you tend to end up with chaos.

William Poundstone, author of The Recursive Universe, contrived an analogy to illustrate why searching huge Borgian libraries of knowledge is as difficult as searching the huge Borgian library of nature itself. Imagine, Poundstone said, that there is a library with all possible videos. Like all Borgian spaces, most of the items in this library are full of noise and random grayness. A typical tape would be two hours of snow. The main problem with searching for a viewable video is that no title, call name, or symbol of any sort could represent a random tape in any less space or time than the tape itself. Most of the items in a Borgian library are incompressible into anything shorter than the work itself. (This irreducibility is the current definition of randomness.) To search the tapes, they must be watched, and therefore the information, time, and energy needed to sort through all the tapes would exceed the information, time, and energy needed to create the tape you wanted, no matter what the tape was.

Source: Kevin Kelly

I just wish I was better at programming so I could attempt to sift through the chaos.

Big Brother is watching you

est.

So might as well wade into the extremely sensitive debate about racism in the Sleb Big Brother house. Although being the leftie pinko liberal that I am, I want to talk about the issues surrounding the subject rather than throwing accusations at certain members of the house (although I must admit I am pretty disgusted and ashamed at the actions of the English contestants, regardless of the semantics).

Whether you believe this is racism or not, covert or overt, direct or non-direct, several of the affected parties are not going to do too well out of this. Channel 4 can continue to pretend there isn’t a problem and act as if 30,000 complaints to Ofcom and the suspension of 3 million pounds worth of advertising revenue, it seems as though C4 think its all far too difficult (or sensitive) a situation to get involved in. I think at it’s core the reason this has arisen is due to people not wanting to open a discussion about racism in case they realise that they may have racist tendencies themselves, much easier to hope it’s all just bullying because that’s easier to pigeon-hole and blame on other factors (difficult childhood etc). But racism is a different matter; it can’t be tolerated so no amount of excusing is going to placate the situation. Yet if Channel 4 had been a little more honest with themselves and others then this could have been dealt with in a much more open manner. Take the Big Brother homepage, hmmm, don’t seem to see much about the ‘r’ word that has coasted 3 million, been commented on by the two Prime Ministers of this country as well as the foreign secretary and the Indian Government. As Jeff Jarvis has said, you must host the conversation, not try and control it as it will just be taken somewhere else where you can’t respond.

bb_channel4.gif

I think the only good thing that can come out of this is the instigation of a proper discussion on racism in this country, we have all got a little complacent with Britain being a tolerant society, which in the most part it is. Although it seems that dark elements are behind this facade of tolerance just waiting to come out whenever someone (of a different culture) annoys us.

So what should C4 do? I think it’s a little late now, the point of no return was probably after airing last nights program in which was arguably the episode which cemented people’s perception that racism surely exists in the house (the perception that I also share). You know it’s far too late when the Ofcom site crashes due to heavy traffic.

bb_ofcom1.gif

Oh and maybe when you publically embarrass the Prime Minister in waiting at the same time as asking the government for more cash. Also not very clever.

Oh and how about this for a robust defense:

When the Daily Mirror approached the Channel 4 chief executive, Andy Duncan, yesterday, he scowled and stuck his finger up at the photographer and refused to comment.

Channel 4 chairman Luke Johnson avoided commenting on the issue this morning on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Mr Johnson was repeatedly asked about Celebrity Big Brother, but said only that Channel 4’s views had already been made known in a written statement.

No-one from Channel 4 defended the programme on the network’s 7pm news last night.

Source

Oh dear, textbook example of how to handle accusations of racism very very badly. Ofcourse as some have suggested this may all be intentional anyway, which really makes you feel sick.

iPhone, iSaw, iConquered

est.

Hmmm iPhone. Really really want one….yeah I’d feel like a poser for the first couple of months, but it would be worth it.

Seems as though rather than make the same mistake as in 2001 when various websites berated Apple for getting into a bloated market too late, it seems said people are now attempting to undermine the iPhone with either what it doesn’t do or issues that could apply to existing mobiles (rather than a direct attack on the phone – which seemingly rocks).

The Nokia guy responded by stating that the iPhone is not 3G so not great. Others state it’s only on one carrier (Cingular) so not so great.

All a little screaming at the moon if you ask me, I have never really enjoyed using a mobile, I have got used to their increasingly bizarre ways of performing tasks; deleting texts when a phone call arrives, navigating through twenty screens to find my sent texts, not being notified that the memory is full (just failed sent messages), weird ways of organising lists, having to learn each model’s little traits such as convoluted locking mechanisms and clunky interfaces, the list could go on and on.

When it comes down to it, I want to do the simple things well, why this has been such a problem for mobile manufacturers, I don’t know. Now they are collectively bricking it at the prospect that a company has figured out the best way to perform the simple functions (voice, text, email, internet, music).

Although there are some pretty valid points some raise:

I can’t imagine keeping a screen clean where it’s the primary source of input. At least on the modern-day Treos you can enter pretty much anything via the keyboard and the 5-way input button.

Although to be fair the iPod doesn’t come with any protective/cleaning materials, they leave that to the baying mob of peripheral manufacturers.

Bet you someone will produce a finger sock.

What not to write

est.

Yawn, so thus starts the usual end of year reviews within the blogosphere, what happened in 2006 (quite interesting), what’s going to happen in 2007 (interesting but pointless – essentially a gamble that you can’t ever cash in) and of course the obligatory list of defining words/phrases for the last year or so.

Good one here: http://www.gawker.com/news/blogs/bad-lingo-blogmedia-clichs-222162.php detailing well used phrases such as Evar, OMG, made my [sensory organ] bleed etc.

I am often a little uneasy about articles of this nature, i.e. ‘we feel that [x] is overused and plebs are using them now so we must kill those words and make up new ones the plebs don’t use, thus guaranteeing our superiority’

For me language is not something to be owned by one group, it is agile and organic with groups choosing a selection of the lexicon to define and enhance themselves. This is admittedly what Gawker are attempting to do here, they feel that said definition is too wide so must distance themselves away and redefine. So although its the nature of groups to wish to redefine they’re own selection of the lexicon I guess I just feel that this excludes a lot of people and makes much text and discourse inaccessible to a wider set of users.

And as Gawker admit, they are just as guilty, as I am sure I am in earlier posts, yet if we want to communicate across divides, then understanding that inclusive use of the language becomes increasingly important in an evar increasingly fragmented world (and cyberspace). Ofcourse for those that are and want to stay within a community then the constant re-invention of language is quite necessary for definition and indeed survival.

2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2017 2016 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004