Category — Consumer

Appreciation and link love for my top droppers in January! Feel free to comment while you’re here – no need to drop and run.

• BMWF1Blog – All the buzz about the BMW Sauber F1 team.
• Subjective Soup – A hearty mix of different thoughts from a retired teacher, empty-nester, and optimist – seasoned with a hint of attitude.
• Entrecard SEO – Search engine optimization tips for Entrecard.
• My notes – A diary of notes about online services and tools.
• Zero- Mixed-bag blog of lifehacks and trends – a little of everything.
• I Love-Hate America – An Filipino immigrant’s perspective on the American way of life.
• The Daily Planet – News, current events, recycling, the environment, humor, and daily life.
• Politicus US – Insightful political commentary.
• World Through Coloured Glasses – Perspectives on global trends and the folk technology that affects people’s lives.
• Maitri’s Compassionate Living – A space to gather together blogs celebrating compassion and loving-kindness in myriad forms.

It occurred to me that this is the first time in my life that I’ve had real trust in my President.

What an odd thing.

Ooooooo, I despise Gantt charts. I’m trying to figure out timelines and tasks and resources and milestones, and I just keep thinking that this is the most ridiculous use of anyone’s time. Especially mine.

I’ve updated Gantt Project on my computer, and it’s not very friendly at all. It’s not the fault of the programmers. I’m sure they are totally fantastic, and I can’t complain about having a groovy open-source program to do this stuff. I’m just not sold on the value of spending all this time to do something that seems so obvious. Just make a list, delegate some tasks, and get to work!

I don’t know all the random things that will start popping up, so I’ll actually have to spend time updating the thing, too. Maybe daily. Oh brother.

The whole thing is so subjective. How should I know how long this particular task is going to take? How should I know the percent complete?

So I have an end date. And a begin date. And some milestones that I know.

I guess the trick would be to figure out which tasks can go on simultaneously, and which tasks are dependent on other tasks. That gives me a certain amount of parallel processing. But if some of the resources – the subject matter experts – the doers – are tasked on multiple things, then they’re probably not going to be working on many things at the same time. And then – they have other things to do, too. That can become political, since then you have to get decisions on priority.

There is an implicit methodology, but I don’t yet grasp its ins and outs – and I’m fairly sure that I don’t entirely agree with some of the premises.

To be valuable, it seems as though there should be a master resource database where common tasks have historical data on how long it actually takes to complete. Most of these things could be templated and conceptually modeled with a different system. Then there would be some mediating functionality to enter in whatever bits of data that you know have to be added and the chart would then be produced automatically. The chart is just a a graphical output.

I don’t think in terms of charts. That’s not my “learning style.” To work with charting as a tool seems wasteful – you’re always reinventing everything. I guess a real project manager would have the internal knowledge-base to make better charts, but my estimations are bound to be off. Nevertheless – here is the drop-dead date for the project. And here is the drop-dead date for delivery of the chart.

This is more subjective than grading essays, but it pretends to be some sort of hard data.

Usually I’m invigorated by learning new things, but this doesn’t interest me at all. This is like word problems with trains – I want to banish them forever.

Bah. It’s not that I can’t do it. If I couldn’t do it, it would just be a matter of some research and/or training to remedy the problem.

No, it’s worse than that because I don’t want to do it. Doing things I don’t want to do is incredibly difficult for me. That sounds so childish, I know. We all do things we don’t want to do all the time. I’ve got to unjam this wall of resistance now. Otherwise, I’ll be up all night fighting it and I’ll make life unnecessarily harsh for myself. So I’ve got to trick myself into doing it instead of focusing on that dread in my stomach.

This brings me back to the days of writing my dissertation. Not to be TMI, but menstrual cramps are not helping the situation.

Maybe I’ll just chart out the tasks as a plain old list, where I can rearrange everything and figure out the task dependencies, and then just transfer that to the program as the last step. Some background music might help with that. I can be enjoying my last weekend day – and enjoying the fact that because I have to do this, I don’t have to do some other stuff that otherwise I would be doing – and make it as painfree as possible.

Sounds like a plan.

But…. ooooooooooh, I hate Gantt charts.

I have been seriously remiss in my intellectual (and wifely) support! I haven’t even urged you to buy, read, and comment on hubby’s book – The Allure of Machinic Life: Cybernetics, Artificial Life, and the New AI (Bradford Books, MIT Press)!

Preview The Allure of Machinic Life at Google Books.

I’m a little annoyed about the title, since I preferred “The Lure of Machinic Life” to “The Allure of Machinic Life.” However, the absolutely wonderful bit on me me me in the acknowledgments almost makes up for it. The book cover is extra-special, too, because it features a suggestive artwork by our friend Joseph Nechvatal.

The book is a philosophically-minded constructive analysis that answers Heidegger’s critique of technology in subtle and completely unexpected ways. It builds on the understandings of such thinkers as Lacan, Foucault, Deleuze, Baudrillard and Kittler, but it’s also a very original tour through areas of research that haven’t been connected or critiqued from this kind of perspective. It’s worth the read if only for the interpretive history of research on (and ideas about) artificial life.

I’m biased, but I’m also a pretty good critical reader – and this book is fantastic. I think it’s been mislabeled by the marketing people, so I’m afraid that it won’t be read – and that would really be a shame.

Review
“John Johnston is to be applauded for his engaging and eminently readable assessment of the new, interdisciplinary sciences aimed at designing and building complex, life-like, intelligent machines. Cybernetics, information theory, chaos theory, artificial life, autopoiesis, connectionism, embodied autonomous agents—it’s all here!”
—Mark Bedau, Professor of Philosophy and Humanities, Reed College, and Editor-in-Chief, Artificial Life

In The Allure of Machinic Life, John Johnston examines new forms of nascent life that emerge through technical interactions within human-constructed environments—”machinic life”—in the sciences of cybernetics, artificial life, and artificial intelligence. With the development of such research initiatives as the evolution of digital organisms, computer immune systems, artificial protocells, evolutionary robotics, and swarm systems, Johnston argues, machinic life has achieved a complexity and autonomy worthy of study in its own right.

Drawing on the publications of scientists as well as a range of work in contemporary philosophy and cultural theory, but always with the primary focus on the “objects at hand”—the machines, programs, and processes that constitute machinic life—Johnston shows how they come about, how they operate, and how they are already changing. This understanding is a necessary first step, he further argues, that must precede speculation about the meaning and cultural implications of these new forms of life.

Developing the concept of the “computational assemblage” (a machine and its associated discourse) as a framework to identify both resemblances and differences in form and function, Johnston offers a conceptual history of each of the three sciences. He considers the new theory of machines proposed by cybernetics from several perspectives, including Lacanian psychoanalysis and “machinic philosophy.” He examines the history of the new science of artificial life and its relation to theories of evolution, emergence, and complex adaptive systems (as illustrated by a series of experiments carried out on various software platforms). He describes the history of artificial intelligence as a series of unfolding conceptual conflicts—decodings and recodings—leading to a “new AI” that is strongly influenced by artificial life. Finally, in examining the role played by neuroscience in several contemporary research initiatives, he shows how further success in the building of intelligent machines will most likely result from progress in our understanding of how the human brain actually works.

Language is not only a virus (grin) but also an essential bit of the block of the discourse network that co-evolves with technological change and human action to give rise to the computational assemblage; or, machinic life is always already within you (and without you) but here are some of the details.

Now – go forth and buy many copies, and tell all thine friends (and thine enemies as well) to read and discuss.

Try these too!

• Information Multiplicity: American Fiction in the Age of Media Saturation
• Literature, Media, Information Systems: Essays by Friedrich A. Kittler (Critical Voices) – (introduction, edited and translated)
• Carnival of Repetition: Gaddis’s the Recognitions and Postmodern Theory (Penn Studies in Contemporary American Fiction)
• Foucault Live: Interviews, 1961-84 – (translated)
• In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities (Semiotext(e) / Foreign Agents) – Jean Baudrillard – (translated)
• On The Line (Foreign Agents) – Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari – (translated)