DOCSLIB.ORG

Cognitive Collaboration Why Humans and Computers Think Better Together

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cognitive Collaboration Why Humans and Computers Think Better Together Issue 20 | 2017 Complimentary article reprint Cognitive collaboration Why humans and computers think better together By James Guszcza, Harvey Lewis, and Peter Evans-Greenwood Illustration by Josie Portillo About Deloitte Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee, and its network of member firms, each of which is a legally separate and independent entity. Please see http://www/deloitte.com/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited and its member firms. Please see http://www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of the US member firms of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited and their respective subsidiaries. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Deloitte provides audit, tax, consulting, and financial advisory services to public and private clients spanning multiple industries. With a globally connected network of member firms in more than 150 countries and territories, Deloitte brings world-class capabilities and high-quality service to clients, delivering the insights they need to address their most complex business challenges. Deloitte’s more than 200,000 professionals are committed to becoming the standard of excellence. This communication contains general information only, and none of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, its member firms, or their related entities (collectively, the “Deloitte Network”) is, by means of this communication, rendering professional advice or services. No entity in the Deloitte network shall be responsible for any loss whatsoever sustained by any person who relies on this communication. Copyright © 2017. Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved. 8 Cognitive collaboration Why humans and computers think better together By James Guszcza, Harvey Lewis, and Peter Evans-Greenwood Illustration by Josie Portillo www.deloittereview.com Cognitive collaboration 9 A SCIENCE OF THE ARTIFICIAL LTHOUGH artificial intelligence (AI) has experienced a number of “springs” and “winters” in its roughly 60-year history, it is safe to expect the current AI A spring to be both lasting and fertile. Applications that seemed like science fiction a decade ago are becoming science fact at a pace that has surprised even many experts. The stage for the current AI revival was set in 2011 with the televised triumph of the IBM Wat- son computer system over former Jeopardy! game show champions Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter. This watershed moment has been followed rapid-fire by a sequence of striking break- throughs, many involving the machine learning technique known as deep learning. Computer algorithms now beat humans at games of skill, master video games with no prior instruction, 3D-print original paintings in the style of Rembrandt, grade student papers, cook meals, vacu- um floors, and drive cars.1 www.deloittereview.com 10 Cognitive collaboration All of this has created considerable uncertainty deeper attention than it typically receives: the about our future relationship with machines, ways in which machine intelligence and hu- the prospect of technological unemployment, man intelligence complement one another. AI and even the very fate of humanity. Regard- has made a dramatic comeback in the past five ing the latter topic, Elon Musk has described years. We believe that another, equally vener- AI as “our biggest existential threat.” Stephen able, concept is long overdue for a comeback of Hawking warned that “The development of full its own: intelligence augmentation. With intel- artificial intelligence could spell the end of the ligence augmentation, the ultimate goal is not human race.” In his widely discussed book Su- building machines that think like humans, but perintelligence, the philosopher Nick Bostrom designing machines that help humans think discusses the possibility of a kind of techno- better. logical “singularity” at which point the general THE HISTORY OF THE FUTURE OF AI cognitive abilities of computers exceed those of humans.2 I as a scientific discipline is commonly agreed to date back to a conference Aheld at Dartmouth University in the summer of 1955. The conference was convened “Any sufficiently advanced by John McCarthy, who coined the term “arti- technology is indistinguishable ficial intelligence,” defining it as the science of from magic.” creating machines “with the ability to achieve goals in the world.”4 The Dartmouth Confer- 3 —Arthur C. Clarke’s Third Law ence was attended by a who’s who of AI pio- neers, including Claude Shannon, Alan Newell, Herbert Simon, and Marvin Minsky. Discussions of these issues are often mud- Interestingly, Minsky later served as an advisor died by the tacit assumption that, because to Stanley Kubrick’s adaptation of the Arthur computers outperform humans at various C. Clarke novel 2001: A Space Odyssey. Per- circumscribed tasks, they will soon be able to haps that movie’s most memorable character “outthink” us more generally. Continual rapid was HAL 9000: a computer that spoke fluent growth in computing power and AI break- English, used commonsense reasoning, experi- throughs notwithstanding, this premise is far enced jealousy, and tried to escape termination from obvious. by doing away with the ship’s crew. In short, Furthermore, the assumption distracts atten- HAL was a computer that implemented a very tion from a less speculative topic in need of general form of human intelligence. www.deloittereview.com Cognitive collaboration 11 The attendees of the Dartmouth Conference intelligence is quantified by the so-called “g believed that, by 2001, computers would im- factor” (aka IQ), which measures the degree to plement an artificial form of human intelli- which one type of cognitive ability (say, learn- gence. Their original proposal stated: ing a foreign language) is associated with other cognitive abilities (say, mathematical ability). The study is to proceed on the basis of the con- This is not characteristic of today’s AI appli- jecture that every aspect of learning or any cations: An algorithm designed to drive a car other feature of intelligence can in principle would be useless at detecting a face in a crowd be so precisely described that a machine can or guiding a domestic robot assistant. be made to simulate it. An attempt will be made to find how to make machines use lan- Second, and more fundamentally, current guage, form abstractions and concepts, solve manifestations of AI have little in common kinds of problems now reserved for humans, with the AI envisioned at the Dartmouth Con- and improve themselves [emphasis added].5 ference. While they do manifest a narrow type of “intelligence” in that they can solve prob- As is clear from widespread media speculation lems and achieve goals, this does not involve about a “technological singularity,” this origi- implementing human psychology or brain sci- nal vision of AI is still very much with us to- ence. Rather, it involves machine learning: the day. For example, a Financial Times profile of process of fitting highly complex and power- DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis stated that: ful—but typically uninterpretable—statistical models to massive amounts of data. At DeepMind, engineers have created pro- grams based on neural networks, modelled on For example, AI algorithms can now distin- the human brain. These systems make mis- guish between breeds of dogs more accurately takes, but learn and improve over time. They than humans can.7 But this does not involve can be set to play other games and solve other algorithmically representing such concepts as tasks, so the intelligence is general, not spe- “pinscher” or “terrier.” Rather, deep learning cific. This AI “thinks” like humans do.6 neural network models, containing thousands of uninterpretable parameters, are trained on Such statements mislead in at least two ways. large numbers of digitized photographs that First, in contrast with the artificial general in- have already been labeled by humans.8 In a telligence envisioned by the Dartmouth Con- similar way that a standard regression model ference participants, the examples of AI on can predict a person’s income based on vari- offer—either currently or in the foreseeable ous educational, employment, and psycho- future—are all examples of narrow artificial logical details, a deep learning model uses a intelligence. In human psychology, general www.deloittereview.com 12 Cognitive collaboration photograph’s pixels as input variables to pre- us closer to the original vision articulated at dict such outcomes as “pinscher” or “terrier”— Dartmouth. Appreciating this is crucial for un- without needing to understand the underlying derstanding both the promise and the perils of concepts. real-world AI. The ambiguity between general and narrow LICKLIDER’S AUGMENTATION AI—and the evocative nature of terms like IVE years after the Dartmouth Confer- “neural,” “deep,” and “learning”—invites con- ence, the psychologist and computer fusion. While neural networks are loosely in- scientist J. C. R. Licklider articulated a spired by a simple model of the human brain, F significantly different vision of the relationship they are better viewed as generalizations of between human and computer intelligence. statistical regression models. Similarly, “deep” While the general AI envisioned at Dartmouth refers not to psychological depth, but to the remains the stuff of science fiction, Licklider’s addition of structure (“hidden
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From Atoms to Bits
    Identity and Privacy in a Globalized Community By Joichi Ito June 17, 2002 Version 1.0 See http://www.neoteny.com/jito/english/notebook/privars.html for updates From atoms to bits In his Wired Magazine column of January 1, 1995 “Bits and Atoms” Nicholas Negroponte’ describes the shift in focus from atoms to bits.1 The shift from atoms to bits is still one of the most significant shifts impacting society today. As with most technical trends, people have over-anticipated the short term impact (the dot-com bubble) but have severely under-estimated the long term impact. The impact of digital communication networks and globalization on identities and nations The industrial revolution triggered a cultural shift causing nations to become powerful entities in a globalized geo-political world. The world began to focus on the products of mass production and the world began to focus mostly on the “atoms”. Individuals became able to travel easily and individuals began to be identified and tracked as physical units and physical borders rigorously managed. Digital communication technology and cyberspace has increased greatly the power and value of the non-physical world and is affecting the nature of national borders and identity. Here I would like to explore some of the changes facing an era of digital transnational communications, focusing on value shifting to cyberspace and its impact on identity, authentication and privacy. Scalability of communications as profound as mass production Although cyberspace and bits are rather new, non-physical space is an old idea. A major step toward large-scale shared virtual communities and the scalability of communications was the creation of the printing press and the public.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mother of All Demos
    UC Irvine Embodiment and Performativity Title The Mother of All Demos Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/91v563kh Author Salamanca, Claudia Publication Date 2009-12-12 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The Mother of All Demos Claudia Salamanca PhD Student, Rhetoric Department University of California Berkeley 1929 Fairview St. Apt B. Berkeley, CA, 94703 1 510 735 1061 [email protected] ABSTRACT guide situated at the mission control and from there he takes us This paper analyses the documentation of the special session into another location: a location that Levy calls the final frontier. delivered by Douglas Engelbart and William English on This description offered by Levy as well as the performance in December 9, 1968 at the Fall Computer Joint Conference in San itself, shows a movement in time and space. The name, “The Francisco. Mother of All Demos,” refers to a temporality under which all previous demos are subcategories of this performance. Furthermore, the name also points to a futurality that is constantly Categories and Subject Descriptors in production: all future demos are also included. What was A.0 [Conference Proceedings] delivered on December 9, 1968 captured the past but also our future. In order to explain this extended temporality, Engelbart’s General Terms demo needs to be addressed not only from the perspective of the Documentation, Performance, Theory. technological breakthroughs but also the modes in which they were delivered. This mode of futurality goes beyond the future simple tense continuously invoked by rhetorics of progress and Keywords technology. The purpose of this paper is to interrogate “The Demo, medium performance, fragmentation, technology, Mother of All Demos” as a performance, inquiring into what this augmentation system, condensation, space, body, mirror, session made and is still making possible.
    [Show full text]
  • [Comments] International Internet Policy (NTIA)
    Regulatory Comment Comments submitted to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration in the Matter of: INTERNATIONAL INTERNET POLICY PRIORITIES Ryan Hagemann Alec Stapp Senior Director for Policy Technology Policy Fellow Niskanen Center Niskanen Center Submitted: July 17, 2018 Docket Number: 180124068-8068-01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY One of the primary challenges to the continued free flow of information and speech online is the potential for a “control-driven model” of global Internet governance to supplant the existing American-inspired order. National laws and regulations, promulgated by countries around the world, could potentially impede cross- border information flows, to the significant detriment of not only U.S. companies and private sector interests, but free expression and human rights as well. But the threats to the current paradigm of multistakeholder-driven Internet governance do not spring only from nation-states. The emerergence of advanced technologies, such as automated botnets, hold the potential to devolve considerable power over the globally-networked digital ecosystem into the hands of non-state actors. It is a fragile time for the Internet. To combat these many emerging threats, it is imperative that the United States continue to play a leading role in defending the existing order for Internet governance. Digital commerce and trade requires a consistent, predictable, and simple legal environment to maximize the benefits to human beings worldwide. The right to freedom of expression, similarly, requires certainty and trust in an online environment made possible by a consensus-driven model of governance, led by stakeholders from industry and civil society capable of equitably balancing the complicated trade-offs that no single nation-state can do by fiat.
    [Show full text]
  • Communicative Capital for Prosthetic Agents Patrick M
    This is an unpublished technical report undergoing peer review, not a final typeset article. First draft: July 23, 2016. Current Draft: November 9, 2017. Communicative Capital for Prosthetic Agents Patrick M. Pilarski 1;2∗, Richard S. Sutton 2, Kory W. Mathewson 1;2, Craig Sherstan 1;2, Adam S. R. Parker 1;2, and Ann L. Edwards 1;2 1Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada 2Reinforcement Learning and Artificial intelligence Laboratory, Department of Computing Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada Correspondence*: Patrick M. Pilarski, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, 5-005 Katz Group Centre for Pharmacy and Health Research, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, T6G 2E1. [email protected] ABSTRACT This work presents an overarching perspective on the role that machine intelligence can play in enhancing human abilities, especially those that have been diminished due to injury or illness. As a primary contribution, we develop the hypothesis that assistive devices, and specifically artificial arms and hands, can and should be viewed as agents in order for us to most effectively improve their collaboration with their human users. We believe that increased agency will enable more powerful interactions between human users and next generation prosthetic devices, especially when the sensorimotor space of the prosthetic technology greatly exceeds the conventional control and communication channels available to a prosthetic user. To more concretely examine an agency-based view on prosthetic devices, we propose a new schema for interpreting the capacity of a human-machine collaboration as a function of both the human’s and machine’s degrees of agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Radical Atoms: Beyond Tangible Bits, Toward Transformable Materials Cover Story by Hiroshi Ishii, Dávid Lakatos, Leonardo Bonanni, and Jean-Baptiste Labrune
    Volume XIX.1 | january + february 2012 Radical Atoms: Beyond Tangible Bits, Toward Transformable Materials Cover Story by Hiroshi Ishii, Dávid Lakatos, Leonardo Bonanni, and Jean-Baptiste Labrune Association for Computing Machinery CoVer storY Radical Atoms: Beyond Tangible Bits, Toward Transformable Materials Hiroshi Ishii MIT Media Lab | [email protected] Dávid Lakatos MIT Media Lab | [email protected] Leonardo Bonanni MIT Media Lab | [email protected] Jean-Baptiste Labrune MIT Media Lab | [email protected] Graphical user interfaces (GUIs) appearance dynamically, so they let users see digital informa- are as reconfigurable as pixels on tion only through a screen, as if a screen. Radical Atoms is a vision looking into a pool of water, as for the future of human-material depicted in Figure 1 on page 40. interactions, in which all digital We interact with the forms below information has physical mani- through remote controls, such as festation so that we can interact a mouse, a keyboard, or a touch- directly with it—as if the iceberg screen (Figure 1a). Now imagine had risen from the depths to reveal an iceberg, a mass of ice that pen- its sunken mass (Figure 1c). etrates the surface of the water 2 012 and provides a handle for the mass From GuI to TuI beneath. This metaphor describes Humans have evolved a heightened tangible user interfaces: They act ability to sense and manipulate Februar y as physical manifestations of com- the physical world, yet the digital + putation, allowing us to interact world takes little advantage of our directly with the portion that is capacity for hand-eye coordina- made tangible—the “tip of the ice- tion.
    [Show full text]
  • International Reports 1/2018
    Source: © Yuya Shino, Reuters. Shino, Yuya © Source: The Digital Future Rules for Robots Why We Need a Digital Magna Carta for the Age of Intelligent Machines Olaf Groth / Mark Nitzberg / Mark Esposito 16 We stand at a turning point in human history, on the threshold of an unknown digital future. A powerful new technology, artificial intelligence (AI), permeates every area of our lives, largely thanks to advances in neural networks, modelled loosely on the human brain. Our societies and economies have become increasingly dependent on the use of artificial intelligence. A new set of rules is needed in order to ensure that freedom, inclusion and growth are safeguarded in the future. In other words, we need a digital Magna Carta for the age of cognitive machines. Dawn of the Cognitive Age negotiate a “Charter of Liberties” that would enshrine a body of rights for the aristocrats to Artificial intelligence can detect patterns in serve as a check on the King’s discretionary massive unstructured data sets.1 In view of the power. After lengthy negotiations, an agree- increasing availability of data, it can improve ment was finally reached in June that provided the performance of companies, identify objects greater transparency in royal decision-making, a quickly and accurately, and enable ever faster louder voice for the aristocrats, limits on taxes decision-making, whilst minimising the disrup- and feudal payments, and even some rights tive influences of complex political and human for serfs. This was the famous Magna Carta. It, circumstances. This constellation raises funda- of course, remained an imperfect document, mental questions about the degree of human teeming with special-interest provisions of cer- freedom of choice and inclusion, the signifi- tain social classes.
    [Show full text]
  • Metaverse Roadmap Overview, 2007. 2007
    A Cross-Industry Public Foresight Project Co-Authors Contributing Authors John Smart, Acceleration Studies Foundation Corey Bridges, Multiverse Jamais Cascio, Open the Future Jochen Hummel, Metaversum Jerry Paffendorf, The Electric Sheep Company James Hursthouse, OGSi Randal Moss, American Cancer Society Lead Reviewers Edward Castronova, Indiana University Richard Marks, Sony Computer Entertainment Alexander Macris, Themis Group Rueben Steiger, Millions of Us LEAD SPONSOR FOUNDING PARTNERS Futuring and Innovation Center Graphic Design: FizBit.com accelerating.org metaverseroadmap.org MVR Summit Attendees Distinguished industry leaders, technologists, analysts, and creatives who provided their insights in various 3D web domains. Bridget C. Agabra Project Manager, Metaverse Roadmap Project Patrick Lincoln Director, Computer Science Department, SRI Janna Anderson Dir. of Pew Internet’s Imagining the Internet; Asst. International Prof. of Communications, Elon University Julian Lombardi Architect, Open Croquet; Assistant VP for Tod Antilla Flash Developer, American Cancer Society Academic Services and Technology Support, Office of Information Technology Wagner James Au Blogger, New World Notes; Author, The Making of Second Life, 2008 Richard Marks Creator of the EyeToy camera interface; Director of Special Projects, Sony CEA R&D Jeremy Bailenson Director, Virtual Human Interaction Lab, Stanford University Bob Moore Sociologist, Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), PlayOn project Betsy Book Director of Product Management, Makena Technologies/There;
    [Show full text]
  • Audio Mobilité
    LOCUS SONUS Symposium #8 Audio mobilité Proceedings www.locusonus.org [Author Name] UTC LOCUS SONUS — 8th International Symposium — Audio Mobility — 16-18th of April 2014 Aix en Provence http://locusonus.org/ LOCUS SONUS 8th International Symposium AUDIO MOBILITY 16-18th of April 2014 Aix en Provence http://locusonus.org/ Scientific committee: Richard Kronland-Martinet (LMA - CNRS), Samuel Bordreuil (AMU/CNRS-LAMES), Jean- Paul Thibaud (CRESSON- CNRS), Jacques Sapiega (AMU - ASTRAM), Angus Carlyle (CRISAP), Jean Cristofol (ESAA), Peter Sinclair (ESAA - Locus Sonus), Jérôme Joy (ENSAB - Locus Sonus), Anne Roquigny (Locus Sonus), Elena Biserna, Marie Muller, Laurent Di Biase, Fabrice Métais. 3 LOCUS SONUS — 8th International Symposium — Audio Mobility — 16-18th of April 2014 Aix en Provence http://locusonus.org/ 4 LOCUS SONUS — 8th International Symposium — Audio Mobility — 16-18th of April 2014 Aix en Provence http://locusonus.org/ PROGRAMME Mercredi 16 Avril 2014 @ AMU/LAMES MMSH - Salle Duby 8h30 : Accueil 9h00 : Discours de bienvenue SESSION 1 : GPS, Geolocalisation and Soundwalks. Modérateurs : Elena Biserna & Marie Muller 9h15 Placed Sound(s). The Sound of Locative Media, Frauke Behrendt 9h45 Walking with Ghosts, François Parra 10h15 Mediated Listening Paths: Breaking the Auditory Bubble, Elena Biserna 10h45 Walking, Telling, Listening. Audio Walks, Justin Bennett 11h15 Pause 11h35 Mapping the Iceberg: An Attempt to Model the City of Aix-en-Provence as 3D Sound Mapped on a Real Space, Marie Muller 11h45 Perspectives on Sound Based Augmented Reality Theatre, Joel Cahen 12h15 De l'oreille à l'oeil. Des conditions d'une écriture située, Emmanuel Guez & Xavier Boissarie 12h45 Pause déjeuner SESSION 2 : Mobile Microphones and Remote Listening.
    [Show full text]
  • A Symposium for John Perry Barlow
    DUKE LAW & TECHNOLOGY REVIEW Volume 18, Special Symposium Issue August 2019 Special Editor: James Boyle THE PAST AND FUTURE OF THE INTERNET: A Symposium for John Perry Barlow Duke University School of Law Duke Law and Technology Review Fall 2019–Spring 2020 Editor-in-Chief YOOJEONG JAYE HAN Managing Editor ROBERT HARTSMITH Chief Executive Editors MICHELLE JACKSON ELENA ‘ELLIE’ SCIALABBA Senior Research Editors JENNA MAZZELLA DALTON POWELL Special Projects Editor JOSEPH CAPUTO Technical Editor JEROME HUGHES Content Editors JOHN BALLETTA ROSHAN PATEL JACOB TAKA WALL ANN DU JASON WASSERMAN Staff Editors ARKADIY ‘DAVID’ ALOYTS ANDREW LINDSAY MOHAMED SATTI JONATHAN B. BASS LINDSAY MARTIN ANTHONY SEVERIN KEVIN CERGOL CHARLES MATULA LUCA TOMASI MICHAEL CHEN DANIEL MUNOZ EMILY TRIBULSKI YUNA CHOI TREVOR NICHOLS CHARLIE TRUSLOW TIM DILL ANDRES PACIUC JOHN W. TURANCHIK PERRY FELDMAN GERARDO PARRAGA MADELEINE WAMSLEY DENISE GO NEHAL PATEL SIQI WANG ZACHARY GRIFFIN MARQUIS J. PULLEN TITUS R. WILLIS CHARLES ‘CHASE’ HAMILTON ANDREA RODRIGUEZ BOUTROS ZIXUAN XIAO DAVID KIM ZAYNAB SALEM CARRIE YANG MAX KING SHAREEF M. SALFITY TOM YU SAMUEL LEWIS TIANYE ZHANG Journals Advisor Faculty Advisor Journals Coordinator JENNIFER BEHRENS JAMES BOYLE KRISTI KUMPOST TABLE OF CONTENTS Authors’ Biographies ................................................................................ i. John Perry Barlow Photograph ............................................................... vi. The Past and Future of the Internet: A Symposium for John Perry Barlow James Boyle
    [Show full text]
  • The People Who Invented the Internet Source: Wikipedia's History of the Internet
    The People Who Invented the Internet Source: Wikipedia's History of the Internet PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 02:49:54 UTC Contents Articles History of the Internet 1 Barry Appelman 26 Paul Baran 28 Vint Cerf 33 Danny Cohen (engineer) 41 David D. Clark 44 Steve Crocker 45 Donald Davies 47 Douglas Engelbart 49 Charles M. Herzfeld 56 Internet Engineering Task Force 58 Bob Kahn 61 Peter T. Kirstein 65 Leonard Kleinrock 66 John Klensin 70 J. C. R. Licklider 71 Jon Postel 77 Louis Pouzin 80 Lawrence Roberts (scientist) 81 John Romkey 84 Ivan Sutherland 85 Robert Taylor (computer scientist) 89 Ray Tomlinson 92 Oleg Vishnepolsky 94 Phil Zimmermann 96 References Article Sources and Contributors 99 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 102 Article Licenses License 103 History of the Internet 1 History of the Internet The history of the Internet began with the development of electronic computers in the 1950s. This began with point-to-point communication between mainframe computers and terminals, expanded to point-to-point connections between computers and then early research into packet switching. Packet switched networks such as ARPANET, Mark I at NPL in the UK, CYCLADES, Merit Network, Tymnet, and Telenet, were developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s using a variety of protocols. The ARPANET in particular led to the development of protocols for internetworking, where multiple separate networks could be joined together into a network of networks. In 1982 the Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP) was standardized and the concept of a world-wide network of fully interconnected TCP/IP networks called the Internet was introduced.
    [Show full text]
  • Digimag49.Pdf
    DIGICULT Digital Art, Design & Culture Founder & Editor-in-chief: Marco Mancuso Advisory Board: Marco Mancuso, Lucrezia Cippitelli, Claudia D'Alonzo Publisher: Associazione Culturale Digicult Largo Murani 4, 20133 Milan (Italy) http://www.digicult.it Editorial Press registered at Milan Court, number N°240 of 10/04/06. ISSN Code: 2037-2256 Licenses: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs - Creative Commons 2.5 Italy (CC BY- NC-ND 2.5) Printed and distributed by Lulu.com E-publishing development: Loretta Borrelli Cover design: Eva Scaini Digicult is part of the The Leonardo Organizational Member Program TABLE OF CONTENTS Claudia D'Alonzo Fluid Rules Of Audiovideo Geometry. An Interview With Scott Arford .............. 3 Lucrezia Cippitelli Almost Cinema 2009. Looking For The Kinematic Effect .................................... 12 Barbara Sansone Happy Birthday Artfutura .......................................................................................... 16 Elena Gianni New Educational Models: The Amazing Ciid Institute ........................................ 22 Giulia Baldi Joy Ito: On Freedom Of Choice, Namely Creative Commons ............................ 27 Marco Mancuso The Recycled Sound Of Teatrino Elettrico Pigreco .............................................. 31 Alex Foti Climattivista! The Wind Of Climate Justice Arrives In Italy ................................. 41 Salvatore Iaconesi Reff/rewf. Short Chronicle Of A Contagion .......................................................... 44 Serena Cangiano Stelarc’s
    [Show full text]
  • Die Multiple Identität Der Technik
    Kirstin Lenzen Die multiple Identität der Technik | Band 9 Editorial Moderne Gesellschaften sind nur zu begreifen, wenn Technik und Körper konzeptu- ell einbezogen werden. Erst in diesen Materialitäten haben Handlungen einen fes- ten Ort, gewinnen soziale Praktiken und Interaktionen an Dauer und Ausdehnung. Techniken und Körper hingegen ohne gesellschaftliche Praktiken zu beschreiben – seien es diejenigen des experimentellen Herstellens, des instrumentellen Handelns oder des spielerischen Umgangs –, bedeutete den Verzicht auf das sozialtheoreti- sche Erbe von Marx bis Plessner und von Mead bis Foucault sowie den Verlust der kritischen Distanz zu Strategien der Kontrolle und Strukturen der Macht. Die biowissenschaftliche Technisierung des Körpers und die Computer-, Nano- und Netzrevolutionen des Technischen führen diese beiden materiellen Dimensionen des Sozialen nunmehr so eng zusammen, dass Körper und Technik als »sozio-orga- nisch-technische« Hybrid-Konstellationen analysierbar werden. Damit gewinnt aber auch die Frage nach der modernen Gesellschaft an Kompliziertheit: die Grenzen des Sozialen ziehen sich quer durch die Trias Mensch – Tier – Maschine und müssen neu vermessen werden. Die Reihe Technik | Körper | Gesellschaft stellt Studien vor, die sich dieser Frage nach den neuen Grenzziehungen und Interaktionsgeflechten des Sozialen annä- hern. Sie machen dabei den technischen Wandel und die Wirkung hybrider Kon- stellationen, die Prozesse der Innovation und die Inszenierung der Beziehungen zwischen Technik und Gesellschaft und/oder Körper und Gesellschaft zum Thema und denken soziale Praktiken und die Materialitäten von Techniken und Körpern konsequent zusammen. Die Reihe wird herausgegeben von Gesa Lindemann und Werner Rammert. Kirstin Lenzen (Dr.), geb. 1972, forschte als Arbeitswissenschaftlerin am Lehrstuhl und Institut für Arbeitswissenschaft (IAW) der RWTH Aachen sowie als Technik- soziologin an den Instituten für Soziologie der RWTH Aachen und der TU Berlin, wo sie bei Werner Rammert promovierte.
    [Show full text]