Quicksearch Your search for innovation returned 97 results:

The Internet Is Not Forever

In an article by S.E. Smith on The Verge, the author says that "Every few days, I open my inbox to an email from someone asking after an old article of mine that they can’t find. They’re graduate students, activists, teachers setting up their syllabus, researchers, fellow journalists, or simply people with a frequently revisited bookmark, not understanding why a link suddenly goes nowhere. They’re people who searched the internet and found references, but not the article itself, and are trying to track an idea down to its source. They’re readers trying to understand the throughlines of society and culture, ranging from peak feminist blogging of the 2010s to shifts in cultural attitudes about disability, but coming up empty."

404 message

A recent Pew Research Center study on digital decay found that 38 percent of webpages accessible in 2013 are not accessible today. Pages are taken down, URLs are changed, and entire websites vanish. This happens with personal website and blogs but also with scientific journals and local news sites.

Yes, there are places like the wonderful Internet Archive that tries to preserve some sites and pages, but even that is incomplete if their archived version links to a dead page. I can find some archived versions of my own logs and websites in that archive but it is hardle complete. A complete archive would be an impossible task.

The article was titled What happens when the internet disappears? but the Internet itself is not disappearing, though significant prts of it are already gone.

During my time working at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, I had quite robust personal website. This blog actually was hosted there at the beginning. Thankfully, Tim and I moved Serendipity35 before both of us left the university. I was able to change links on my website to point to new locations of mine, but although for some reason my webspace still is online, I don't have privileges to change anything anymore. That means that things that are out of date or just plain wrong are still there - and people do find those pages.

A page I have there about some early experimenting I did with the crude chatbot ELIZA was found by a researcher writing about the chatbot's history, and a producer from BBC Radio found it and did an interview with me about it for a program. I wish I could update it, but that's not possible on that server.

Smith says in that article "Every digital media format, from the Bernoulli Box to the racks of servers slowly boiling the planet, is ultimately doomed to obsolescence as it’s supplanted by the next innovation, with even the Library of Congress struggling to preserve digital archives."

Books and letters crumble, artwork disintegrates and photography fades, and though we try to save the most important things, we don't know what will be important in the next century.

An AI Code of Conduct

code

CC BY-SA 3.0 Alpha Stock Images - Nick Youngson

 

In what I consider to be more of a "business" story, Canada's voluntary AI code of conduct is coming. As an article headline says "not everyone is enthused." Some businesses are concerned rules could stifle innovation and dull competitive edge.

Companies that sign onto the code are agreeing to multiple principles, including that their AI systems are transparent about where and how information they collect is used, and that there are methods to address potential bias in a system. In addition, they agree to human monitoring of AI systems and that developers who create generative AI systems for public use create systems so that anything generated by their system can be detected.

It is interesting that the URL for a story on this includes the term "stopgap"  cbc.ca/news/business/ai-code-of-conduct-stopgap which is defined as a temporary way of dealing with a problem or satisfying a need.

Something similar to Canada's plan is expected to be done in the United States and in the European Union via the EU Artificial Intelligence Act.

A Toast to the Tech Future

Businessman holding transparent tablet innovative future technology

LinkedIn Top Voices in Tech & Innovation were asked their thoughts about the technologies shaping the future of how we live and work. I'm wary of "thought leaders" and prognostication in general, but I know it is part of all this. There are buzzworthy topics that I have written about here - the metaverse, NFTs, Roblox - which are all starting to have an impact but likely have not changed your present.

Here are some links to these voices. See if someone piques your interests and read their post or follow them.

Allie Miller - Global Head of Machine Learning BD, Startups and Venture Capital, AWS - Miller is all about AI

Anthony Day - Blockchain Partner, IBM -  blockchain in crypto, NFTs and other trends and innovations

Asmau Ahmed - Senior Leader, X, the moonshot factory - she posts about her company’s latest work - robots, access to clean and reliable power, improving availability of safe drinking water (by harvesting water from air)

Many of these people are consciously or unconsciously also posting about who they are and how they got to where they are - and perhaps, where they want to go.

Avery Akkineni - President, VaynerNFTT which is Gary Vaynerchuk’s new NFT venture.

Bernard Marr - Founder & CEO, Bernard Marr & Co. - a self-defined futurist, he writes cars, phones, delivery robots, trends in artificial intelligence and machine learning.

Cathy Hackl - Chief Metaverse Officer, Futures Intelligence Group - how many CMOs have you heard of so far? Her agency helps companies prepare for the metaverse.

Martin Harbech worked at Google and Amazon prior to Meta (formerly Facebook) and shares news and updates from the tech industry. You might read about remote truck drivers, photorealistic avatars, or haptic gloves research. He also shares insights on new companies and the future of various industries.

Lateral Thinking

head
Thinking by Magda Ehlers from Pexels

With all the concern about the pandemic this year, moving courses online and making plans for reopening, I'm afraid that what has been set aside is pedagogy. I did graduate work on a doctorate in pedagogy that I never completed, but it exposed me to a lot of ideas on how we might improve our teaching.

One of the things I learned about some decades ago is lateral thinking developed by Edward de Bono in the 1960s. Lateral thinking fosters unexpected solutions to problems. De Bono believed that we tend to go for the straightforward, and obvious solutions to problems. He encouraged seeking out more oblique, innovative answers.

Lateral thinking is sometimes called “horizontal thinking” as contrasted with vertical thinking. The latter might be defined as going for the first good solution that comes to mind and launch into the details.

Lateral thinking encourages a longer brainstorming session in order to enhance creativity and come up with the most innovative solutions.

There are several lateral thinking techniques: awareness, random stimulation, alternatives, and alteration.

For de Bono, we need to cultivate an awareness of how our minds process information. That is a skill that is very rarely part of any curriculum, and yet moving away from established patterns leads to greater innovation.

Random stimulation is something I have been employing during this pandemic year - and I suspect many readers of this have also - probably unconsciously - done it. Normally, we try to shut out all distractions in order to focus on a task. In lateral thinking, problem-solving improves with some "random" input which often includes information - taking a walk, talking with a colleague or stranger, listening to a podcast, journaling.

At the heart of de Bono's approach is to deliberately consider alternative solutions. That has been described is many ways, including "thinking out of the box." Doing this is not easy for many people. His term, "alteration," can mean using several techniques. You might reverse the relationship between parts of a problem. You might deliberately go in the opposite direction of what’s implied as the correct approach. Sometimes breaking a problem or obvious solution into smaller parts can lead to an alternate mindset about individual parts.

It didn't help the spread of de Bono's theories in academia that he was not a fan of extensive research. He had called research “artificial.” For example, he claimed that “nobody has been able to prove that literature, history or mathematics classes have prepared people for society” - though I think we all believe that they have helped prepare people.

Lateral thinking has its critics, but the basics are sound and I have always thought that incorporating them into classroom activities is a good thing. I have never "taught" de Bono to students, preferring to embed it in activities.