San Francisco, 11:32 AM
Mon Dec 14
17 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz |
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders |
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner |
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis |
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan |
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier |
Ed Grabianowski |
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan |
Lauren Davis |
Chris Hsiang |
Lynn Peril |
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins |
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox |
Interns:
Tim Barribeau |
Julia Carusillo |
Alex Eichler |
Cyriaque Lamar |
Caitlin Petrakovitz |
Mary Ratliff |
Josh Snyder |
@Chip Overclock: '' 'futurism' is 'this might happen.' "
Nah.
Futurism is "This might happen, and you should pay me huge money to tell you that, because I'm a giant con-man. If you aren't looking for a con-man, that guy at the bus stop can make stuff up just as well as me, for free."
Science fiction and fantasy are sold as entertainment, and thus have a vastly more ethical business model.
-Kle.
@Klebert L. Hall: He obviously does more with his life than navel-gaze. If that's all it takes to get paid, then I would be a billionaire godking by now.
So basically you are saying that it's a waste of time to try and imagine how things could be, where things might be heading? Why are you here?
@JimBonJovi:
Nope, I'm saying that it's a waste of time for corporations to pay people for blue-sky speculation.
Imagining the future is great. Paying someone to come and make predictions based upon nothing but imagination and conjecture is not good corporate policy. "Inspiring imagination in others" isn't really something you can do reliably enough to put on the payroll. If some business wants it's employees to be more imaginative, they should hire some more imaginative employees.
"Joseph Coates put it this way: "Being right or wrong isn't so much the point as being useful. "
My point is that futurists have very rarely proven to be useful.
Mostly they're just consultants on the same idea as the various scam-gurus that also bilk stupid CEOs.
@Klebert L. Hall: I think your whole point is nothing but opinion, and you have no way of proving how useful they are, or even explaining what you think this usefulness entails to anybody who is not you. But that's just my opinion.
Oh I liked this movie! The subject matter wasn't treated very well mainly because it something that ignites long long debates (determinism vs free will). Also had tons of religious imagery which kind of tries to reconcile the religion vs science aspect of humanity.
PLUS the incredible ending of the world scene with Bethoven's funeral march... very ad hoc.
So I kinda liked it!
it sounds like it's not a dispute over the technology, just the name by which it is called. if i had a real product i was trying to market as doing something useful i'd sue a movie that included the name of my product attached to something obviously fake and useless.
Their suit sounds a bit thin. I mean the methods in the film might somewhat resemble Global Findability's patents, but what the hell? If some movie uses a patented technology as a plot device, the patent owners can now sue? How have they been harmed? If an author describes the process in a written story, is he liable too?
From what I can tell of that patent, and I didn't go over it too closely, it looks like some type of system for capturing video and redistributing it to targeted sites (e.g. schools) by using location attributes. Alot in there about locational advertising and delivery systems. Sort of an on demand product for local communities/businesses, maybe?
And also, I'd like to know how they trademarked the word "geocode". It's a term that has been used for a long time in mapping and GIS in particular, for finding the geographic coordinates of a location from other information (such as an address). This company sounds like it's run by persons of questionable character.
12/11/09
"futurism" is "this might happen".
"science fiction" is "if this happens, this will be the consequences".
"fantasy" is "this will never happen, but what fun anyway".
None of them are "this will happen", and any attempt to do so even in the short term pretty much sucks at it.
12/12/09
'' 'futurism' is 'this might happen.' "
Nah.
Futurism is "This might happen, and you should pay me huge money to tell you that, because I'm a giant con-man. If you aren't looking for a con-man, that guy at the bus stop can make stuff up just as well as me, for free."
Science fiction and fantasy are sold as entertainment, and thus have a vastly more ethical business model.
-Kle.
12/12/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
-Kle.
12/11/09
So basically you are saying that it's a waste of time to try and imagine how things could be, where things might be heading? Why are you here?
12/12/09
Nope, I'm saying that it's a waste of time for corporations to pay people for blue-sky speculation.
Imagining the future is great. Paying someone to come and make predictions based upon nothing but imagination and conjecture is not good corporate policy. "Inspiring imagination in others" isn't really something you can do reliably enough to put on the payroll. If some business wants it's employees to be more imaginative, they should hire some more imaginative employees.
"Joseph Coates put it this way: "Being right or wrong isn't so much the point as being useful. "
My point is that futurists have very rarely proven to be useful.
Mostly they're just consultants on the same idea as the various scam-gurus that also bilk stupid CEOs.
-Kle.
12/12/09
12/13/09
Sure.
Here's a much clearer version of my opinion:
Futurists are the television evangelists of science.
-Kle.
12/11/09
"WTF?"
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/03/09
PLUS the incredible ending of the world scene with Bethoven's funeral march... very ad hoc.
So I kinda liked it!
12/03/09
12/03/09
The real answer to the article's title is: Nic Cage's Career.
12/03/09
12/03/09
I have spoken.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
Also, the Global Findability people sound like snake oil artists to me.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
I'm free.
12/03/09
From what I can tell of that patent, and I didn't go over it too closely, it looks like some type of system for capturing video and redistributing it to targeted sites (e.g. schools) by using location attributes. Alot in there about locational advertising and delivery systems. Sort of an on demand product for local communities/businesses, maybe?
And also, I'd like to know how they trademarked the word "geocode". It's a term that has been used for a long time in mapping and GIS in particular, for finding the geographic coordinates of a location from other information (such as an address). This company sounds like it's run by persons of questionable character.
12/03/09