An international CONFERENCE, a scholarly JOURNAL, a BOOK series, and an online KNOWLEDGE COMMUNITY
![[rss]](http://techandsoc.com/wp-content/themes/k2_1.0.3/images/feed.png)
Want to get your 2011 publications underway now?
We are now accepting submissions for the 2011 volume of The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society. The next submission deadline is Monday 9 August 2010.
Refereeing of submitted papers will commence shortly so start the submission process early by submitting your proposal.
Paper submission guidelines are available online.
The latest issue of The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society includes:
From philosophy bites
The upward spiral of artificial intelligence looks set to produce machines which are cleverer and more powerful than any humans. What happens when machines can themselves create super-intelligent machines? ‘The Singularity’ is the name science fiction writers gave to this situation. Philosopher David Chalmers discusses the philosophical implications of this imaginable situation with Nigel Warburton in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast.
From Ashlee Vance, The New York Times
On a Tuesday evening this spring, , the co-founder of , became part man and part machine. About 40 people, all gathered here at a campus for a nine-day, $15,000 course at Singularity University, saw it happen.
While the flesh-and-blood version of Mr. Brin sat miles away at a computer capable of remotely steering a robot, the gizmo rolling around here consisted of a printer-size base with wheels attached to a boxy, head-height screen glowing with an image of Mr. Brin’s face. The BrinBot obeyed its human commander and sputtered around from group to group, talking to attendees about Google and other topics via a videoconferencing system.
The BrinBot was hardly something out of “Star Trek.” It had a rudimentary, no-frills design and was a hodgepodge of loosely integrated technologies. Yet it also smacked of a future that the Singularity University founders hold dear and often discuss with a techno-utopian bravado: the arrival of the Singularity — a time, possibly just a couple decades from now, when a superior intelligence will dominate and life will take on an altered form that we can’t predict or comprehend in our current, limited state.
From Clive Thompson, The New York Times
“Toured the Burj in this U.A.E. city. They say it’s the tallest tower in the world; looked over the ledge and lost my lunch.”
This is the quintessential sort of clue you hear on the TV game show “Jeopardy!” It’s witty (the clue’s category is “Postcards From the Edge”), demands a large store of trivia and requires contestants to make confident, split-second decisions. This particular clue appeared in a mock version of the game in December, held in Hawthorne, N.Y. at one of I.B.M.’s research labs. Two contestants — Dorothy Gilmartin, a health teacher with her hair tied back in a ponytail, and Alison Kolani, a copy editor — furrowed their brows in concentration. Who would be the first to answer?
Neither, as it turned out. Both were beaten to the buzzer by the third combatant: Watson, a supercomputer.
From Tom Simonite in MIT’s Technology Review:
A person living in upstate Michigan may gain significantly more from the death of analog television than someone living in New York City–at least, as far as long-range wireless Internet is concerned, a study suggests. On November 4, 2008, the Federal Communications Commission voted to allow the “white spaces” in the radio spectrum that were freed up by the analog television switch-off to be used for long-distance wireless Internet connectivity. This spectrum will be unlicensed, meaning any standards-compliant device can use it.
The most detailed analysis yet of the potential of these white spaces for long-distance wireless Internet has now been published by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley. Their models illustrate how the interaction of population density, television stations, and economics will determine what consumers ultimately get.
From Sasha Frere-Jones in The New Yorker:
No one knows what the future of the music business will look like, but the near future of listening to music looks a lot like 1960. People will listen, for free, to music that comes out of a stationary box that sits indoors. They’ll listen to music that comes from an object that fits in the hand, and they’ll listen to music in the car. That box was once a radio or a stereo; now it’s a computer. The handheld device that was once a plastic AM radio is now likely to be a smart phone. The car is still a car, though its stereo now plays satellite radio and MP3s. But behind the similarities is a series of subtle shifts in software and portability that may relocate the experience of listening—even if nobody has come close to replacing the concept of the radio d.j., whose job lingers as a template for much software.
“Of the twenty hours a week that an average American spends listening to music, only three of it is stuff you own. The rest is radio,” Tim Westergren told me. Westergren is the founder of Pandora, one of several firms that have brought the radio model to the Internet. Pandora offers free, streaming music, not so different from the radio stations that many people grew up with, except that the d.j. is you, more or less.
The fourth issue of Volume 6 of The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society has now been published.
Volume 6, Number 4 contains:
Continue reading ‘Technology Journal, Volume 6, Number 4 now available’
The latest issue of The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society includes:
From Angus McCullough, 3 Quarks Daily
Tetris is a video game about clearing away what is unnecessary in the best possible way, accessible on almost every gaming console imaginable, on cellular phones and for free on the Internet. Perhaps you played it once on an ancient game system in your youth or maybe you play it whenever you’re sitting at your desk at work. Alexei Pajitnov, the creator of Tetris, calls it the first “casual game”, meaning that it is timeless in just such a way: it is the same every time you play, without plot or characters to follow. The first time you played it in middle school is the same game that is probably programmed into your phone today. To compare Tetris to any other game is somehow wrong – it is a masterful test of how our brains function while trying to balance instinctual and intellectual challenges in real time. The major difference between Tetris and other games is the simplicity of its construction and complexity of play. Most importantly, it is a game that does not have a goal or end. There is no castle to storm or high score to achieve – the only way to end your game is to lose. The result of this simple and mildly daunting setup is that Tetris affords the user a repetitive task every time he or she picks it up: to play better than the last time. It has also been shown to have beneficial effects outside the game itself, making it a powerful tool for personal development, mirroring certain aspects of Confucian ritual.