Summary of the Media and Tech Preview 2016 Discussion Panel Held at Frankfurt Kurnit in NYC on December 2, 2015

"dtv svttest", Image by Karl Baron

“dtv svttest”, Image by Karl Baron

GPS everywhere notwithstanding, there are still maps on the walls in most buildings that have a red circle somewhere on them accompanied by the words “You are here”. This is to reassure and reorient visitors by giving them some navigational bearings. Thus you can locate where you are at the moment and then find your way forward.

I had the pleasure of attending an expert panel discussion last week, all of whose participants did an outstanding job of analogously mapping where the media and technology are at the end of 2015 and where their trends are heading going into the New Year. It was entitled Digital Breakfast: Media and Tech Preview 2016, was held at the law firm of Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz in midtown Manhattan. It was organized and presented by Gotham Media, a New York based firm engaged in “Digital Strategy, Marketing and Events” as per their website.

This hour and a half presentation was a top-flight and highly enlightening event from start to finish. My gratitude and admiration for everyone involved in making this happen. Bravo! to all of you.

The panelists’ enthusiasm and perspectives fully engaged and transported the entire audience. I believe that everyone there appreciated and learned much from all of them. The participants included:

The following is a summary based on my notes.

Part 1:  Assessments of Key Media Trends and Events in 2015

The event began on an unintentionally entertaining note when one of the speakers, Jesse Redniss, accidentally slipped out his chair. Someone in the audience called out “Do you need a lawyer?”, and considering the location of the conference, the room erupted into laughter.¹

Once the ensuing hilarity subsided, Mr. Goldblatt began by asking the panel for their media highlights for 2015.

  • Ms. Bond said it was the rise of streaming TV, citing Netflix and Amazon, among other industry leaders. For her, this is a time of interesting competition as consumers have increasing control over what they view. She also believes that this is a “fascinating time” for projects and investments in this market sector. Nonetheless, she does not think that cable will disappear.
  • Mr. Kurnit said that Verizon’s purchase of AOL was one of the critical events of 2015, as Verizon “wants to be 360” and this type of move might portend the future of TV. The second key development was the emergence of self-driving cars, which he expects to see implemented within the next 5 to 15 years.
  • Mr. Redniss concurred on Verizon’s acquisition of AOL. He sees other activity such as the combination of Comcast and Universal as indicative of an ongoing “massive media play” versus Google and Facebook. He also mentioned the significance of Nielsen’s Total Audience Measure service.²
  • Mr. Sreenivasan stated that social media is challenging, as indicated by the recent appearance of “Facebook fatigue” affecting its massive user base. Nonetheless, he said “the empire strikes back” as evidenced in their strong financial performance and the recent launch of Chan Zuckerberg LLC to eventually distribute the couple’s $45B fortune to charity. He also sees that current market looking “like 2006 again” insofar as podcasts, email and blogs making it easy to create and distribute content.

Part 2: Today’s Golden Age of TV

Mr. Goldblatt asked the panel for their POVs on what he termed the current “Golden Age of TV” because of the increasing diversity of new platforms, expanding number of content providers and the abundance of original programming. He started off by asking them for their market assessments.

  • Ms. Bond said that the definition of “television” is now “any video content on any screen”. As a ubiquitous example she cited content on mobile platforms. She also noted proliferation of payment methods as driving this market.
  • Mr. Kurnit said that the industry would remain a bit of a “mess” for the next three or four years because of the tremendous volume of original programming, businesses that operate as content aggregators, and pricing differentials. Sometime thereafter, these markets will “rationalize”. Nonetheless, the quality of today’s content is “terrific”, pointing to examples by such media companies as the programs on AMC and HBO‘s Game of Thrones. He also said that an “unbundled model” of content offerings would enable consumers to watch anywhere.
  • Mr. Redniss believes that “mobile transforms TV” insofar as smartphones have become the “new remote control” providing both access to content and “disoverability” of new offerings. He predicted that content would become “monetized across all screens”.
  • Mr. Sreenivasan mentioned the growing popularity of binge-watching as being an important phenomenon. He believes that the “zeitgeist changes daily” and that other changes are being “led by the audience”.

The panel moved to group discussion mode concerning:

  • Consumer Content Options: Ms. Bond asked how will the audience pay for either bundled or unbundled programming options. She believes that having this choice will provide consumers with “more control and options”. Mr. Redniss then asked how many apps or services will consumers be willing to pay for? He predicted that “everyone will have their own channel”. Mr. Kurnit added that he thought there are currently too many options and that “skinny bundles” of programming will be aggregated. Mr. Sreenivasan pointed towards the “Amazon model” where much content is now available but it is also available elsewhere and then Netflix’s offering of 30 original shows. He also wanted to know “Who will watch all of this good TV?”
  • New Content Creation and Aggregation: Mr. Goldblatt asked the panelists whether a media company can be both a content aggregator and a content creator. Mr. Kurnit said yes and Mr. Redniss immediately followed by citing the long-tail effect (statistical distributions in business analytics where there are higher numbers of data points away from the initial top or central parts of the distribution)³. Therefore, online content providers were not bound by the same rules as the TV networks. Still, he could foresee some of Amazon’s and Netflix’s original content ending up being broadcast on them. He also gave the example of Amazon’s House of Cards original programming as being indicative of the “changing market for more specific audiences”. Ultimately, he believes that meeting such audiences’ needs was part of “playing the long game” in this marketplace. 
  • Binge-Watching: Mr. Kurnit followed up by predicting that binge-watching and the “binge-watching bucket” will go away. Mr. Redniss agreed with him and, moreover, talked about the “need for human interaction” to build up audiences. This now takes the form of “superfans” discussing each episode in online venues. For example, he pointed to the current massive marketing campaign build upon finding out the fate of Jon Snow on Games of Thrones.
  • Cord-Cutting: Mr. Sreenivasan believes that we will still have cable in the future. Ms. Bond said that service offerings like Apple TV will become more prevalent. Mr. Kunit said he currently has 21 cable boxes. Mr. Redniss identified himself as more of a cord-shaver who, through the addition of Netflix and Hulu, has reduced his monthly cable bill.

Part 3: Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR)

Moving on to two of the hottest media topics of the day, virtual reality and augmented reality, the panelist gave their views.

  • Mr. Sreenivasan expressed his optimism about the prospects of VR and AR, citing the pending market launches of the Oculus Rift headset and Facebook 360 immersive videos. The emergence of these technologies is creating a “new set of contexts”. He also spoke proudly of the Metropolitan Museum Media Lab using Oculus for an implementation called Diving Into Pollack (see the 10th project down on this page), that enables users to “walk into a Jackson Pollack painting”.
  • Mr. Kurnit raised the possibility of using Oculus to view Jurassic Park. In terms of movie production and immersion, he said “This changes everything”.
  • Mr. Redniss said that professional sports were a whole new growth area for VR and AR, where you will need “goggles, not a screen”. Mr. Kurnit followed up mentioning a startup that is placing 33 cameras at Major League Baseball stadiums in order to provide 360 degree video coverage of games. (Although he did not mention the company by name, my own Googling indicates that he was probably referring to the “FreeD” system developed by Replay Technologies.)
  • Ms. Bond posed the question “What does this do for storytelling?”4

(See also these 12 Subway Fold posts) for extensive coverage of VR and AR technologies and applications.)

Part 4: Ad-Blocking Software

Mr. Goldblatt next asked the panels for their thoughts about the impacts and economics of ad-blocking software.

  • Mr. Redniss said that ad-blocking apps will affect how advertisers get their online audience’s attention. He thinks a workable alternative is to use technology to “stitch their ads into content” more effectively.
  • Mr. Sreenivasan believes that “ads must get better” in order to engage their audience rather than have viewers looking for means to avoid them. He noted another alternative used on the show Fargo where network programming does not permit them to use fast-forward to avoid ads.
  • Mr. Kurnit expects that ads will be blocked based on the popularity and extensibility of ad-blocking apps. Thus, he also believes that ads need to improve but he is not confident of the ad industry’s ability to do so. Furthermore, when advertisers are more highly motivated because of cost and audience size, they produce far more creative work for events like the NFL Super Bowl.

Someone from the audience asked the panel how ads will become integrated into VR and AR environments. Mr. Redniss said this will happen in cases where this technology can reproduce “real world experiences” for consumers. An example of this is the Cruise Ship Virtual Tours available on Carnival Cruise’s website.

(See also this August 13, 2015 Subway Fold post entitled New Report Finds Ad Blockers are Quickly Spreading and Costing $Billions in Lost Revenue.)

Part 5: Expectations for Media and Technology in 2016

  • Mr. Sreenivasan thinks that geolocation technology will continue to find new applications in “real-life experiences”. He gave as an example the use of web beacons by the Metropolitan Museum.
  • Ms. Bond foresees more “one-to-one” and “one-to-few” messaging capabilities, branded emjois, and a further examination of the “role of the marketer” in today’s media.
  • Mr. Kurnit believes that drones will continue their momentum into the mainstream. He sees the sky filling up with them as they are “productive tools” for a variety of commercial applications.
  • Mr. Redniss expressed another long-term prospect of “advertisers picking up broadband costs for consumers”. This might take the form of ads being streamed to smart phones during NFL games. In the shorter term, he can foresee Facebook becoming a significant simulcaster of professional sporting events.

 


1.  This immediately reminded of a similar incident years ago when I was attending a presentation at the local bar association on the topic of litigating cases involving brain injuries. The first speaker was a neurologist who opened by telling the audience all about his brand new laptop and how it was the latest state-of-the-art-model. Unfortunately, he could not get it to boot up no matter what he tried. Someone from the back of audience then yelled out “Hey doc, it’s not brain surgery”. The place went into an uproar.

2.  See also these other four Subway Fold posts mentioning other services by Nielsen.

3.  For a fascinating and highly original book on this phenomenon, I very highly recommend reading
The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More (Hyperion, 2005), by Chris Anderson. It was also mentioned in the December 10, 2014 Subway Fold post entitled Is Big Data Calling and Calculating the Tune in Today’s Global Music Market?.

4.  See also the November 4, 2014 Subway Fold post entitled Say, Did You Hear the Story About the Science and Benefits of Being an Effective Storyteller?

The Growing Need to Standardize and Validate Online Education Credentials for the Job Market

"Graduation Caps", Image by John Walker

“Graduation Caps”, Image by John Walker

Near the end of The Matrix, right after Neo and Trinity have their epic battle with the agents on the rooftop , he turns to her and asks whether she “can fly that thing”, referring to a nearby helicopter. They need to do this in order proceed to rescue Morpheus. She doesn’t know how to … just quite yet. Then she takes out her mobile phone to call Apoc and ask him to quickly upload a program to her virtual self that will enable her to pilot the chopper.

The very first time I saw this groundbreaking sci-fi film, at the Regal Union Square Stadium 14 on Broadway and 13th Street in Manhattan, the audience laughed at the absurdity of this dialog. While they were utterly dazzled by the rest of the narrative and strikingly original special effects (especially the astonishing and brain-melting sequence known as “bullet time” where Neo fights and clearly proves he’s no neophyte), this was still an awkward moment because people were laughing at this otherwise captivating film.

While I doubt that anyone would still laugh at this line in today’s world of all things networked and digital, we still have not reached anywhere near the point where people can have new skills and knowledge uploaded right to our brains. Well, at least not anytime soon and, to say the least, doing so would redefine the whole notion of an “upgrade”.

Nonetheless, there has been an enormous revolution in the breadth and diversity of webwide learning platforms. These are now available to anyone anywhere anytime with online access and a desire to learn. The benefits and the potential of online education were first taken up here in a Subway Fold Post on February 15, 2015 entitled A Real Class Act: Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are Changing the Learning Process. I have taken MOOCs on everything from content strategy to project management to basic programming and have learned a great deal from them.

Standards Still Lacking for Online Education Credentials

However, in today’s highly competitive economy and job market, employers are just not sure how to evaluate prospective workers when they list online courses on their resumes and discuss them at interviews. There is no standardization yet in the requirements and weighting of these credentials. This critical issue was taken up in a very timely and informative feature in the November 18, 2015 edition of The Wall Street Journal entitled Online Skills Are Hot, But Will They Land You a Job? by Lauren Weber. I will summarize and annotate it, and pose some of my own non-academic questions.

Employers are currently searching for people with latest “technical and digital skills”. As a result, there has been a significant increase in the services rendered by course providers including Udemy and Lynda.com, coding bootcamps, and MOOCs such as Coursera and edX. These online learning platforms aim to assist workers in enhancing their skills or to provide “experience they didn’t get in college”. Nonetheless, many managers still neither trust nor recognize these new providers and their course offerings.

According to Anthony Carnevale, the director of Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce, there is no central authority setting any standards for these online educational providers. Some of the job seekers who have taken these online classes are likewise frustrated by this situation.

Independent Groups Trying to Create Credential Standards

An effort to create such standards has recently been undertaken by a group of academic researchers with additional assistance from trade groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation. Support for this also includes a $2.25 million grant from the Lumina Foundation, whose stated goal is for 60% of Americans to gain post-high school training by 2025. This project involves creating an online registry for use by both employers and workers to research credentials. This is intended for either group to “see exactly what skills they reflect”.

The creation of this credential registry is currently being done as a joint project by George Washington University, Southern Illinois University and the American National Standards Institute. A pilot of the directory is expected to be rolled out sometime during mid-2016.

The working group plans to assure employers that an online educator’s credentials (or “badges”) are “a sign of rigorous training”, by surveying employers about the credentials held by employees in specific roles. This will be done in an effort to provide validation for particular courses and badges.

(I also searched and found a position paper entitled Connecting Credentials: Making the Case for Reforming the U.S. Credentialing System, published by The Lumina Foundation in June 2015. I highly recommend a click-through and full read of this for the clear and compelling case it makes for this project.)

Similar initiatives have also been developed by:

  • LinkedIn which is engaged in a pilot program in Phoenix and Denver. The company is canvassing area employers about the skills they are seeking and the credentials of the workers they have recently hired. Using this information, the job networking site will permit users to learn the skills they will need for a particular job and the classes and training that “recent hires in that role have had”. This service will launch in early 2016.
  • TechHire which is a new U.S. government venture launched earlier this year by the Obama administration, whose mission is to expedite training and employment opportunities “for people without traditional academic backgrounds”. It is expected to accelerate the validity of the credentials it is offering by persuading “employers to review their skill requirements” and coordinate with training providers of “nontraditional coursework” including coding boot camps and online classes.

Employer Initiative to Test Applicant’s Job-Specific Skills

Employers on their own initiatives may soon be testing job applicants’ tech and marketing skills with simulations. These could be given in conjunction with interviews. During an HR conference in 2014, a number of companies demo-ed such tests for a wide range of specific skills from “basic math to drafting legal contracts”.¹

According to Dennis Yang, the CEO of Udemy, if these gain wide acceptance, college degrees or technical certificates might no longer be relevant. Rather, for him, the two key criteria are the ability and the willingness to learn new things.

Currently, recruiters believe that badges and credentials from online education programs indicate someone’s receptivity to learning. For example, Melkeya McDuffie, the Senior Director of Talent Acquisition recently promoted an employee at Waste Management, Inc. partly because he had taken some relevant MOOCs on Coursera. She was impressed that he had taken the initiative to do so and could demonstrate his knowledge.²

My Questions

  • Would a hybrid of credential standardization and skills simulations be another viable approach? That is, could the groups involved in each of these efforts could inform, influence and shape each others’ work?
  • How would either or both of these processes be affected in jobs requiring state or federal licensing?
  • Should employees in certain jobs be somehow incentivized by their employers to take duly certified online courses in order to remain current in their fields? Should companies factor online courses taken into an employee’s annual performance review?

 


1.  See also a September 12, 2014 post on Lawyerist.com entitled The Legal Tech Audit Proves Lawyers Are Terrible at Technology, by Lisa Needham.

2.  See also an October 23, 2015 article in the Houston Chronicle entitled Waste Management Overhauls Its Recruiting by Sarah Scully, where Ms. McDuffie is also quoted several times.

Three New Perspectives on Whether Artificial Intelligence Threatens or Benefits the World

"Gritty Refraction", Image by Mark Oakley

“Gritty Refraction”, Image by Mark Oakley

As the velocity of the rate of change in today’s technology steadily continues to increase, one of the contributing factors behind this acceleration the rise of artificial intelligence (AI). “Smart” attributes and functionalities are being baked into a multitude of systems that are affecting our lives in many visible and, at other times, transparent ways. Just to name one well-known example of an AI-enabled app is Siri, the voice recognition system in the iPhone. Two recent Subway Fold posts have also examined AI’s applications in law (1) and music (2).

However, notwithstanding all of the technological, social and commercial benefits produced by AI, a widespread reluctance, if not fear, of its capabilities to produce negative effects still persists. Will the future produce consequences resembling those in the Terminator or Matrix movie franchises, the “singularity” predicted by Ray Kurzweil where machine intelligence will eventually surpass human intelligence, or perhaps other more benign and productive outcomes?

During the past two weeks, three articles have appeared where their authors have expressed more upbeat outlooks about AI’s potential. They believe that smarter systems are not going to become the world’s new overlords (3) and, moreover, there is a long way to go before computers will ever achieve human-level intelligence or even consciousness. I highly recommend reading them all in their entirety for their rich content, insights and engaging prose.

I will sum up, annotate and comment upon some of the key points in these pieces, which have quite a bit in common in their optimism, analyses and forecasts.

First is a reassuring column by Dr. Gary Marcus, a university professor and corporate CEO, entitled Artificial Intelligence Isn’t a Threat—Yet, that appeared in the December 12, 2014 edition of The Wall Street Journal. While acknowledging the advances in machine intelligence, he still believes that computers today are nowhere near “anything that looks remotely like human intelligence”. However,  computers do not necessarily need to be “superintelligent” to do significant harm such as wild swings in the equities markets resulting from programming errors.(4)

He is not calling for an end to further research and development in AI. Rather, he urges proceeding with caution with safeguards carefully in place focusing upon on the apps access to other networked systems, in areas such as, but not limited to, medicine and autos. Still, the design, implementation and regulation of such “oversight” has yet to be worked out.

Dr. Marcus believes that we might now be overly concerned about any real threats from AI while still acknowledging potential threats from it. He poses questions about levels of transparency and technologies that assess whether AI programs are functioning as intended. Essentially, a form of “infrastructure” should be  in place to evaluate and “control the results” if needed.

Second, is an article enumerating five key reasons why the AI apocalypse is not nearly at hand right now. It is aptly entitled Will Artificial Intelligence Destroy Humanity? Here are Reasons Not to Worry, by Timothy B. Lee, which was posted on Vox.com on December 19, 2014. The writer asserts that the fears and dangers of AI are far overstated based on his research and interviews with some AI experts. To sum up these factors:

  • Actual “intelligence” is dependent on real world experience such that massive computing power alone will not produce comparable capabilities in machines. The example cited here is studying a foreign language well enough to pass as a native speaker. This involves both book learning and actually speaking with locals in order to include social elements and slang. A computer does not and never will have these experiences nor can they simulate them.
  • Computers, by their very nature, must reply on humans for maintenance, materials, repairs and ultimately, replacement. The current state of robotics development is unable to handle these responsibilities. Quite simply, machines need us and will continue to do so for a long time.
  • Creating a computerized equivalent of a real human’s brain is very tough and remains beyond the reach of today’s circuitry and programming.  Living neurons are indeed quite different in their behaviors and responses than digital devices.  The author cites the modeling of weather simulations as one where progress has been relatively small despite the huge increases in available processing capacity. Moreover, simulating brain activity in the an effort to generate a form of intelligence is relatively far more difficult than modeling weather systems.(5)
  • Relationships, more than intelligence, are needed to acquire power in the real world. Looking at the achievements of recent US presidents, the author states that they gained their achievements by virtue of their networks, personalities and skills at offering rewards and penalties. Thus, machines assist in attaining great technological breakthroughs, but only governments and companies can assemble to capital and resources to implement great projects. Taking this logic further, machines could never take over the world because they utterly lack the capability to work with the large numbers of people needed to even attempt this. (Take that, SkyNet.)
  • Intelligence will become less valuable as its supply increases according to the laws of supply and demand. As the pricing of computing continues to fall, their technological capabilities continues to rise. As the author interprets these market forces, the availability of “super-intelligent computers” will become commoditized and, in turn, produce even more intelligent machines where pricing is competitive. (6)

The third article presents a likewise sanguine view on the future of AI entitled Apocalypse or Golden Age: What Machine Intelligence Will Do to Us, by Patrick Ehlen, was posted on VentureBeat.com on December 23, 2014. He drew his research from a range of leaders, projects and studies to arrive at similar conclusions that the end of the world as we know it is not at hand because of AI. This piece overlaps with the others on a number of key points. It provides the following additional information and ideas:

  • Well regarded university researchers and tech giants such as Google are pursuing extensive and costly AI research and development programs in conjunction with their ongoing work into such areas as robotics, machine learning, and modeling simple connectomes (see fn.5 below).
  • Unintended bad consequence of well-intentioned research are almost always inevitable. Nonetheless, experts believe that the rate of advancement in this field will continue to accelerate and may well have significant impacts upon the world during the next 20 years.
  • On August 6, 2014, the Pew Internet Research Project published a comprehensive report that was directly on point entitled AI, Robotics, and the Future of Jobs by Aaron Smith and Janna Anderson. This was compiled based on surveys of nearly 1,900 AI experts. To greatly oversimplify the results, while there was largely a consensus view on the progress in this field and ever-increasing integration of AI into numerous areas, there was also a significant split of opinion as the economic,  employment and educational effects of AI in conjunction with robotics. (I highly recommend taking some time to read through this very enlightening report because of its wealth of insights and diversity of perspectives.)
  • Today we are experiencing a “perfect storm” where AI’s progress is further being propelled by the forces of computing power and big data. As a result, we can expect “to create new services that will redefine our expectations”. (7)
  • Certain sectors of our economy will realize greater benefits from the surge in AI than others.(8) This, too, will be likely to cause displacements and realignments in employment in these areas.
  • Changes to relevant social and public policies will be needed in order to successfully adapt to AI-driven effects upon the economy. (This is similar to Dr. Marcus’s views, above, that news forms of safeguards and infrastructure will become necessary.)

I believe that authors Marcus, Lee and Ehlen have all made persuasive cases that AI will continue to produce remarkable new goods, services and markets without any world threatening consequences. Yet they all alert their readers about the unintended and unforeseeable economic and social impacts that likely await us further down the road. My own follow up questions are as follows:

  • Who should take the lead in coordinating the monitoring of these pending changes? Whom should they report to and what, if any, regulatory powers should they have?
  • Will any resulting positive or negative changes attributable to AI be global if and when they manifest themselves, or will they be unevenly distributed in among only certain nations, cities, marketplaces, populations and so on?
  • Is a “negative” impact of AI only in the eye of the beholder? That is, what metrics and analytics exist or need to be developed in order to assess the magnitudes of plus or minus effects? Could such standards be truly objective in their determinations?
  • Assuming that AI development and investment continues to race ahead, will this lead to a possible market/investment bubble or, alternatively, some form of AI Industrial Complex?
  • So, is everyone looking forward to the July 2015 release of Terminator Genisys?

___________________________________

1.  See Possible Futures for Artificial Intelligence in Law Practice posted on September 1, 2014.

2.  See Spotify Enhances Playlist Recommendations Processing with “Deep Learning” Technology posted  on August 14, 2014.

3.  The origin of the popular “I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords” meme originated in the Season 5 episode 15 of The Simpsons entitled Deep Space Homer. (My favorite scene in this ep is where the – – D’oh! – – potato chips are floating all around the spaceship.)

4.   In Flash Boys (W.W. Norton & Company, 2014), renowned author Michael Lewis did an excellent job of reporting on high-speed trading and the ongoing efforts  to reform it. Included is coverage of the “flash crash” in 2010 when errant program trading caused a temporary steep decline in the stock market.

 5For an absolutely fascinating deep and wide analysis of current and future projects to map out all of the billions of connections among the neurons in the human brain, I suggest reading Connectome: How the Brain’s Wiring Makes Us Who We Are (Houghton Mifflin, 2012), by Sebastian Seung.  See also a most interesting column about the work of Dr. Seung and others by James Gorman in the November 10, 2014 edition of The New York Times entitled Learning How Little We Know About the Brain. (For the sake of all humanity, let’s hope these scientists don’t decide to use Homer J. Simpson, at fn.3 above, as a test subject for their work.)

6.  This factor is also closely related to the effects of Moore’s Law which states that the number of transistors that can be packed onto a chip doubles almost doubles in two years (later revised to 18 months). This was originally conceived by Gordon E. Moore, a legendary computer scientists and one of the founders of Intel. This principal has held up for nearly fifty years since it was first published.

7.  This technological convergence is fully and enthusiastically  explored in an excellent article by Kevin Kelly entitled The Three Breakthroughs That Have Finally Unleashed AI on the World in the November 2014 issue of WIRED.

8This seems like a perfect opportunity to invoke the often quoted maxim by master sci-fi and speculative fiction author William Gibson that “The future is already here – it’s just not very evenly distributed.”

New Visual Perspectives on Tweeting, Movies and Life

Remember when birds were the only ones still tweeting? Well, not to twitter* away too much time on this point, but I highly recommend checking out a new visualization of nightingale’s and a canary’s vocalizations were posted on TheNextWeb.com in a brief post on August 21, 2014 entitled 3D Bird Sound Visualization is Electrifying. (The direct link to this appears in the text.) The title understates the 2:30 video created by a multimedia artist named Andy Thomas. IMHO, this is an extraordinarily beautiful visualization that transposes the mellifluous sounds of these birds singing into an animation of how this “look” to the artist. Furthermore, if you find this as entertaining and imaginative as I did, I further recommend a click-through and full perusal of the artist’s blog called Nature Remixed displaying a series of galleries of his beautiful “motion art” and other still-frame graphics. Be sure to scroll down on the home page for the technical details of how he make this creations.

(Looking at these pages also reminded me of the breathtakingly imaginative artwork of Roger Dean, particularly on the Rock Posters page of his website.**)

Fortunately, TheNextWeb.com published another highly original visualization just two days later on August 23rd, entitled The Colors of Motion is an Interactive Visualization of Movie Color. (Likewise, the direct link is in the text.) Here designer Charlie Clark has devised a means to display the color palettes of 27 well known films from the last 30 years or so. Clicking on any of the movie titles takes you to a screen where the “average color” of hundred of frames from the film have been analyzed by a methods developed by Clark. For instance, it always seemed to me that in The Matrix, there seemed to be a greenish tint to many scenes while in Avatar it appeared to be more of a blue-ish tint to much of it. Both films are part of this project. Thus, as you click through the sample frames you will see these hues change in some fascinating ways. Simply this has to be seen and explored first hand to fully appreciate just how clever this visualization is in examining this particular aesthetic element of many iconic films. Please also try a click-through to his full Charlie Clark website to enjoy a deep and wide display of his immense artistic talent.

I very much hope that the artist will apply this analysis to more films from the past, present and then in the future. I wonder how the vibrantly colored palette of this summer smash hit Guardians of the Galaxy would be parsed by this.

Finally, for another dramatically different visualization that is artistically sophisticated in its presentation, not about art per se, but rather, about the author’s life, I suggest checking out an article that was posted on Wired.com on August 27, 2014, entitled An Infographic Genius Plots Out Another Insanely Detailed Year of His Life by Joseph Flaherty. This concerns, as their creator has termed them “Annual Reports” in the form of multi-dimensional inforgraphic displays of nearly 100,000 data points recorded detail of designer Nicholas Felton’s life during 2013. He has been generating these productions since 2005 (all available on his personal website which is linked to within this story’s text). To say that this is very granular does not even begin to describe it. The details he has charted about seemingly everything he did during this year appears to go to an nearly quantum level never seen anywhere else before. With the rapid advancements in all manner of electronically recording personal data as well as the tools for analyzing and visualizing it, Felton talks about his incorporation of these means within the article.

Other people have been engaged in similar activities in recent years which has come to be known as “lifelogging“. (See also A Modest Proposal: Everyday Lifelogging by Charles Q. Choi, posted November 30, 2011 on ScientificAmerican.com.) Taking this sort of activity another step, hop, crawl and leap  forward also appeared in an article in the September 3, 2014 edition of The New York Times entitled Here, Ansel! Sit, Avedon! Apparently some of the participants have pursued this endeavor with dogged determination and tried to hog the spotlight, while others who were more reticent had to be brought out of their shell to get them to engage.
_________________
* Yes, small “t”.
** Yes, many from Yes.