Guilt Posting

Okay, I have to admit it - I have nothing worthwhile to post. Nada. Zip. I got back from Cape Cod last week exhausted, stayed exhausted through the week, and came down with a cold that floored me all weekend. I mean, if we're so technologically advanced, why can't we do something better than Tylenol for the cold?

But since I've started this thing, I have an obligation to write something. Luckily, my favorite writer, Neal Stephenson has just released a new book, Quicksilver. I'm a big Stephenson fan and reccommend picking up something from him, like Cryptonomicon or Snow Crash. I'm a chapter into the new book and am already intrigued; if you want to see where the evolution of Cyberpunk has gone, check Stephenson out. (Also, the latest William Gibson book wasn't that bad...)

Vivid Dreams, Part Deux

Man, I don't know what I'm doing before going to sleep, but the dreams have been especially vivid this week! And as seems par for the course, they seem to get me thinking about this blog. Talk about obsessive!

As some might know, my original "training" was in the Fine Arts - Printmaking, to be exact. My specific focus was hand lithography - the use of limestone, ink, and pressure to make prints. Very analog, very 19th century. Unfortunately, because of the large outlay of equipment required, I haven't been able to make lithographs for over five years. In fact, it was this problem that pushed me into the digital realm; it was much easier to fit a computer into limited space and budget than a large press, limestone blocks, etc...

So last night, I dreamt I was working in Lithography again. I remembered grinding the stones level, drawing on the surface, which is a beautiful experience ( a former teacher described it as "drawing on the eggshell surface"). And then processing, printing, etc. Even now I can hear the hiss of the ink as the roller moves back and forth, the smell of the chemicals used to stabilize the image, all of the sights, sounds, and rhythms of this somewhat archaic disciplne. And I miss it, miss it greatly - while I can never claim to have been a great lithographer, I can claim a great love for it's processes.

Which, after waking, got me thinking. Can I claim as great a love for my new digital media? Can I recall with loving fondness the writing of code, or the scanning of images, or the surfing of a web site? As much as I love digital imaging and web design, I can't see myself pining for it. It doesn't have the sentimental charge - a keyboard is a keyboard, a monitor is a monitor. I mean, I do love certain computers I have used, but I figure that's just my psyche personifying them - why else give them names. They're one step below pets, nearly family members. But the processes itself? Can't say I remember my first program or first web page with the same fondness as my first lithographs, drawings, or other analog art objects

Now is this a good or a bad thing? No idea, really. I suspect both. In support of older, analog techniques, I believe that sentimentality helps instill respect and tradition to a disciplne. Just like the goofy robes you wear during graduations, traditions form to protect and pass on disciplnes; they are ties to the past and thus unite across the decades or centuries. Traditions define the transmission of technique and lore, like the old guild halls of yore. However, without tradition the Digital Mediums can progress unhindered; without a history holding them back, digital artists are truly free to explore everything. To paraphrase a story about John Cage, the avant-garde composer, Cage was visiting Europe when a European Musician approached him and asked, "How can you compose music with no history behind you?" To which Cage replied (in his impish way), "How can you compose music with so much history behind you?"

Of course, I suspect the answer is different for all people - some require history, some require freedom to strike out alone. Let's hope we find a way to provide both aspects in the new Digital Millenium.

Vivid Dreams Up Ahead

Okay, I had the weirdest dreams last night. At one point, I'm a vigilante superhero out to save the world from a messy garret. Next, I'm sailing on a swoop that's shiprwrecked by pirates. I mean, it was one weird night!

But the most interesting dream came near the end of my sleep. In it, I'm with a bunch of talking animals (go figure), and we are walking in a park. One of the animals goes into a thicket, and inside we find these strange, Tyranosaurus Rex-type creatures. Turns out that they're from an advanced civilization, and they set up the world as a test case to study de-evolution. They started out with their culture and let it de-evolve entropically, going through the dinosaur age, then furry creatures that de-evolved from creatures like us and the world we live in. Needless to say, I was a bit disoriented when I woke up

But what an interesting idea! I mean, we are constantly fed the idea that our civilization moves forward, that everything we do is in the name of progress (okay, this is a Western concept, but hey - that's where I live, you know). But what if we're actually moving toward dystopia? What if the good old days were the good old days, and we'd be better off in caves than on the 'Net? What if our entire conception of reality is simply a test in watching a system degenerate and fall to pieces. Would explain some stuff, no?

Now I'm not saying that my dream-inspired uber-dinosaurs were correct. I am saying that it's an interesting and slightly entertaining idea. And to quote my wife when I told her, "Isn't that what Devo was all about?"

Knowledge Gets a Bad Rap

I have to admit, I've become a Lord of the Rings junkie. I mean, like every pre-teen child in the 80s, I read the series and played the random D & D game. But with the release of the new Peter Jackson movies, I have re-immersed myself in Tolkein's world. Books, movies, director's cut - you name it, I'm currently reading/viewing/playing it (okay, no video games yet, but that's because the wife has OUTLAWED them).

So, it was with excitement last week that I began watching the newly released Two Towers DVD. And I began noticing something when I was viewing a preview of the "deleted" scenes available on the extended edition. Saruman, the evil wizard featured in the first two movies and played by Christopher Lee, manipulates the events from his distant tower through magic and lackeys (human and non-human alike). Like a chess player, he positions his forces and lets them roam about the countryside, smiting heroes whenever possible. Why did this strike me as interesting? Why is it in this blog? Because nearly every time he takes action, he first consults one or another tome on magic and lore. And many characters, in implying that Saruman has changed significantly (i.e., became "evil"), points out that he doesn't "get out" of his tower like he used to. And while some might read that as the perils of being anti-social, I think it combines as an indictment of learned versus experienced knowledge.

I mean, there only appears to be three characters who interact with books in the film (so far): Saruman, Bilbo, and Gandalf. Saruman (representing the reader) uses the "book knowledge" to do evil while Bilbo (representing the writer) has become possessed by evil. Even Gandalf, a certain symbol of good, gets downright pushy and paranoid after visiting an ancient library in the first movie. In contrast, all the movie's heroes learn lessons out in the real world. Aragorn is the typical mountain man, living off the land and learning it's secrets. Elrond, the font of Elven wisdom, has been alive, well, forever, and thus has a phenominal personal memory of events. Even the lowly hobbits have to journey out into the world to understand the great quest they've become embroiled in. All of this seems to point to the fact that knowledge gained without experience (i.e., Saruman and his books) is fraught with danger and corruption.

Now being a big fan of knowledge in general, and books in particular, I find the implication a bit grating. I mean, there have been many doctorial papers written on how Tolkein's series is a condemnation on mechanization and the Industrial Revolution, but what if it's actually a critique of how we impart knowledge itself? Either that, or I was watching the movie at way-too-late an hour!

Good Luck, Bill

Just a short note today: the AP is reporting that Bill Joy, Co-Founder of Sun Microsystems and general technology pundit, is leaving Sun to pursure other challenges. If you've never had the chance to hear Joy speak or read his writing, you are missing out; I have found him to be one of the most thoughtful and engaging minds in the current technology field. Here's to wishing him the best in his next endeavors - I know I'll be keeping one eye on him.

Me, Supporting Microsoft?

That's right, I am now going to come in on an issue and support Microsoft. A weird place to be for me. But over the last two months, the Redmond giant lost a patent infringement case with Eolas. Normally, this doesn't bother me much (I mean, Microsoft has lost or settled many cases concerning patent infringement), but this one strikes deep into my territory - the use of plug-ins on the web

Eolas gained rights to a University of California 1994 patent whereby information could be remotely accessed by an application through small "applets" or plug-ins, minature applications that loaded information from a server. Sounding familiar yet? They started their legal proceedings against Microsoft in 1999, claiming that Windows 95, Windows 98, and Internet Explorer violated their patents with it's use of Active X and other technologies. Well, back in July the court upheld Eolas' claims, and the case is currently winding it's way toward appeals.

Now, I don't mind giving up Active X. But the broadly written patent applies to any plug-in technology, such as Flash, Quicktime, Java, etc. Basically, if you can embed it in a web page, it is violating the patent. This is a big, big deal - embedding technology into web pages and browsers is commonplace now, and their delivery of media-rich applications is one reason for the growth of the broadband web. I just shudder to think that every single browser is now, in one way or another, illegal and at the mercy of Eolas and their legal department.

In many ways, this reminds me of the current legal uproar between SCO and the Linux community. Like that issue, here is a small company with a questionable business plan using the patent and copyright laws to survive an otherwise unsupportive marketplace. The only difference, that I see right away, is that Eolas really does have legal legs to stand on. But isn't there a point when the good of the public must override the good of the few? That the web could, in all honesty, revert to a technological state more like 1993 than 2003 gives one pause. And yet, without such legal protections, large corporations like Microsoft could easily steal and bully smaller companies like Eolas (okay, I guess they did that already).

This issues has such wide reaching implications that the W3C, the governing Internet Standards Body, is showing fear and organizing to find alternatives to this problem. eWeek, among many others, is beginning to cover this issue, and I suspect we shall hear much more about it in the coming months. Keep your fingers crossed and enjoy your Strongbad Emails now - you might not be able to view them next year!