Geoffrey Rockwell

The current issue of Wired has another use (similar to Google’s) of comics to explain research advances in AI and gaming. In this case they feature Polaris by the U of Alberta Computer Poker Research Group led by Michael Bowling. The comic booklet, Ante Up, Human: The Adventures of Polaris, the Poker-Playing Robot features Michael in a smoking jacket and blue bunny slippers. I’m guessing the bunnies are a reference to the arctic hares that we have here in Edmonton, though it should be said that I have never seen Michael in such garb.

The interesting point is how Polaris chooses personalities for extended play.

In Loving Memory of the Mainframe (aka IMS) is a site with a YouTube video of the goodbye New Orleans jazz funeral that was held outside in the snow at the University of Manitoba for their IBM 650 mainframe. See the Network World story How to really bury a mainframe. The Network World site provides a transcript of the eulogy including this,

Farewell IMS, we’ll remember you well. After forty-seven years, there are many stories to tell. Like when Tel Reg nearly shut down MTS, and when the Y2K bug put us under duress. You helped us achieve our academic objectives, and gave our admin processes a proper perspective.

But now we must lay you under the flora, because we have to go deal with this bloody Aurora. So we commit your parts to be recycled. Earth to Earth. Ashes to Ashes. Dust to Dust. To the god of computers, please bless it and keep it, and give it grace and peace, but please do not resurrect it.

Now, how do we bury projects this gracefully?

Poking around the MacArthur Foundation site I found an interesting recent study on Teens, Video Games and Civics by the Pew Internet & American Life Project. The full report has too much to summarize in a blog entry. Here is their list of “Summary Findings at a Glance”:

• Almost all teens play games.
• Gender and age are key factors in describing teens’ video gaming.
• Youth play many different kinds of video games.
• The most popular games played by teens today span a variety of genres and ratings.
• Gaming is often a social experience for teens.
• Close to half of teens who play online games do so with people they know in their offline lives.
• Teens encounter both pro-social and anti-social behavior while gaming.
• The most popular game genres include games with violent and nonviolent content.
• Parental monitoring of game play varies.
• There are civic dimensions to video game play.
• The quantity of game play is not strongly related to teens’ interest or engagement in civic and political activity.
• The characteristics of game play and the contexts in which teens play games are strongly related to teens’
  interest and engagement in civic and political activities.
• Playing games with others in person was related to civic and political outcomes, but playing with others online
  was not.
• Teens who take part in social interaction related to the game, such as commenting on websites or contributing
  to discussion boards), re more engaged civically and politically.
• Civic gaming experiences are more equally distributed than many other civic learning opportunities. (p. viii)

This study brought in the Mills College Civic Engagement Research Group (CERG) who have released a White Paper on The Civic Potential of Video Games (PDF) which discusses the social and civic aspects of gaming. One interesting result (also found in the Pew summary) is that it seems that teens who play games socially in person “are more likely to be civically and politically engaged than teens who play games primarily alone.” (p. 18) Online gaming seems to be “a weak form of social interaction” (p. 20) compared to in person social gaming. Another finding that contradicts the accepted (parental) wisdom that gaming is bad for youth is that,

The stereotype of the antisocial gamer is not reflected in our data. Youth who play games frequently are just as civically and politically active as those who play games infrequently. (p. 24)

The Globe and Mail had a story today on Mamas, don’t let your babies grow up to be Luddites by Patrick White (Nov. 25, 2008) that reports on a MacArthur Foundation funded study on, Living and Learning with New Media. This study looked at how youth participate in “the new media ecology.” (p. 1 of the PDF Summary of Findings from the Digital Youth Project.) The report describes the “always on” connectivity of youth and their “friendshi-driven” practices. I was intrigued by the description of a subset who “geek out.”

Some youth “geek out” and dive into a topic or talent. Contrary to popular images, geeking out is highly social and engaged, although usually not driven primarily by local friendships. Youth turn instead to specialized knowledge groups of both teens and adults from around the country or world, with the goal of improving their craft and gaining reputation among expert peers. While adults participate, they are not automatically the resident experts by virtue of their age. Geeking out in many respects erases the traditional markers of status and authority. (p. 2 of the Two Page Summary)

The Digital Youth Project led by Mizuko Ito brought together researchers at USC and Berkeley. They have a book forthcoming from MIT Press called Hanging Out, Messing Around, Geeking Out: Living and Learning with New Media that is online at the site.

Esquire has a great story on The Video-Game Programmer Saving Our 21st-Century Souls by Jason Fagone (Nov. 20, 2008) which features “Jason Rohrer’s solitary and stubborn quest for a future in which pixels and code and computers will make you cry and feel and love”. Rohrer created the game Passage about which Clint Hocking of Ubisoft said:

Why can’t we make a game that fucking means something? A game that matters? You know? We wonder all the time if games are art, if computers can make you cry, and all that. Stop wondering. The answer is yes to both. Here’s a game that made me cry. It did. It really did.

I balk at the idea that a game to mean something has to have “lesson.” This reminds of the tedious pedagogical dialogues of the 18th century which really would have been better presented as lessons. The meaning of works that don’t present explicit opinions lies in the reflection provoked. Thus they are more like questions than answers. Or, to be more accurate, they are like a path of questioning since a game has the time to move questioning.

Thanks to Peter O for this.

So I got another minute of fame being interviewed for a story in the Edmonton Sun, More fam-Wii fun despite downturn. The interesting thing is how games seem to be recession-proof and how well the Wii is doing.

Despite a flagging economy, $1.31 billion US was spent on video games in October in the U.S. alone - a gain of 18% from September.

The spike is being led by Nintendo’s Wii interactive console, which according to figures from market research company NPD Group outpaced its competitors by selling 803,000 consoles in October.

I wonder how high definition screens will do this Christmas? I would have thought this is the time for people to switch, but the news suggests otherwise.

The Globe and Mail yesterday had a full page story on 1858: How a violent year created a province. This story about the birth of British Columbia 150 years ago draws from the University of Victoria site Colonial Despatches which has images and text of the despatches. Neat project.

It’s remarkable, what a slender thread British authority hung by,” UVIC history professor John Lutz, who helped give birth to the new website, bcgenesis.uvic.ca, said in an interview.

University of Affairs has a story online about how Some graduates question thesis publication requirement. The article gives as examples, students in creative writing programs who obviously want to go on and publish their theses. They don’t mention the serious issue of the license that Theses Canada makes you sign. I wonder if it would be possible for a graduate student to edit the license before signing it?

Stan pointed me to the 2006 Council of Canadian Academies | Conseil des académies canadiennes report on The State of Science & Technology in Canada (Summary and Main Findings, PDF 2.6 mb). The report tries to identify Canada’s strengths and weaknesses in the Science & Technology field, though they have a broad understanding of S&T. There is good news for arts and technology.

The ICT field demonstrating the most promise in the view of respondents — i.e., with the highest net upward trend rating — is New Media, Multimedia, Animation and Gaming, where Canada is internationally recognized as a leader, with a number of successful companies as well as a reputation for superb skills training. (p. 9)

They also identify Humanities Computing as a transdisciplinary field of strength,

Survey respondents perceived significant strength in some emerging fields such as nanoscale materials and biotechnologies, quantum informatics and humanities computing. These latter transdisciplinary fields are specialities for which future prospects are seen to be more significant than currently established strength. (p. 10)

Here is a chart from page 39 showing the Humanities and the Arts:

From Susan a link to Social Computing in 2020: Bluesky Innovation Competition - UC Transliteracies Project. This competition is hosted by the University of California Transliteracies Project and UC Santa Barbara
Social Computing Group and is open to any student from any discipline. I think competitions like this and T-REX are going to become a more common way of fostering innovation and rewarding ideas.

Ever wondered what it was like to stand in the Roman forum back in 320 CE? Well, growing up in Rome and being dragged through the now hot and dusty forum I have wondered what it was like back then amny times. Now I can fly around imperial Rome thanks to a collaboration between the Rome Reborn project led by Bernie Frischer at Virginia and Google Earth. You can download the latest Google Earth viewer and relevant layers at Google Earth Rome. All that is missing is people.

This project has recieved a lot of press like the BBC story, Google Earth revives ancient Rome. I first noticed it on the Italian Google News where it made the Top Stories front page yesterday (called Prima Pagina in the Italian.) The mayor of Rome, Gianni Alemanno even blogged it on the Google blog inviting people to tour.

The idea that virtual technologies now let people experience the city that I guide as it appeared in 320 A.D. fills me with pride — a pride that I inherited from Rome’s glorious past.

As a humorous aside, there is an interesting view to be had if you go through the “floor” of ancient Rome. Then you see the satellite view of modern Rome (flattened) below the ancient 3D model in an interesting inversion of the archaeological layers.

Here you see the distinctive design of Michelangelo’s Campidoglio beneath the model. The lines are the flags for items of interest that you can click on to get descriptions of the buildings.

The Edmonton Journal has a story today titled “It took a while, but Ms. Pacman has her audience: Girl gamers take up controllers” by David Wylie for the Canwest News Service (A10, November 12, 2008.) The story reports that a Entertainment Software Association of Canada study “found that half of Canadian gamers are women”. (The study isn’t available on the ESA Canada web site, which, for that matter, doesn’t have any press releases after 2007. Time for an update, Eh!) The story also reports that the Entertainment Software Association (of the USA?) 2008 Essential Facts about the Computer and Video Game Industry (PDF) puts the percentage of female game players at 40%. The Edmonton Journal story has some cute quotes from the woman they interviewed for the story:

“I think womean and gaming are a perfect match,” she (McIndoe) says. “It is incredibly social.” … “There is always something to talk about. And the ladies love to talk.”

“Things really took off once I met my husband; we didn’t have a lot of money, so we would stay up and play video games together. To be honest, it was him working the congroller and me shouting instructions — truly th beginning of a happy marriage.”

The story goes on to make the usual points about how games are marketed to me, how there are female-focused tournaments like Fight like a Girl (think Halo 3 for charity), and how there are all-girl clans.

I’m not sure I trust the ESA or ESAC facts, but I suspect there is a trend towards more women playing games, especially social games. What would computer game culture look like if it was dominated by older women? How would they design games?

The Ithaka organization has released a report on the Sustainability and Revenue Models for Online Academic Resources with support from the Strategic Content Alliance and JISC in the U.K. The report deals with the difficult question of how to sustain all the free online resources we have built in the first enthusiasm of the web.

There is no single formula that Online Academic Resources (OARs) can apply to achieve sustainability, no ‘one-size-fits-all’ plan that any organization can follow to reach a point of financial stability. There are, however, a variety of processes and approaches that can help to improve the likelihood of entrepreneurial success. In an age when traditional content producers – including scholarly publishers and newspapers – struggle to maintain their financial footing in face of the challenges of the digital world, OARs cannot turn to lessons of the past to find their way, but must see themselves as nimble players in a quickly shifting field.

Part of the problem is that we think of the digital as if it were a grant project with a print outcome. You do the research, you develop the resources, you publish it and then you move on. Digital publication seems to be cheaper and faster than print, but the true cost is the sustainability. You can get it up faster, but then you have to maintain it forever. The report argues that the problem is that academics, as smart as they are, don’t know how to think like entrepreneurs.

Clearly the leaders of these initiatives are competent professionals; why do they not rely on processes that have proven effective in both commercial and not-for-profit contexts? We have concluded that a key reason for this is that academic researchers tend to approach these problems from a different perspective, and with a different mindset, than do commercial entrepreneurs. (Page 5)

For this reason the report presents an entrepreneurial start-up model which excludes academics who can’t focus soley on a project (which is most of us):

Running a start-up is a full-time job and requires full-time leadership. The mode of principal investigators, in which they divide their time between overseeing a variety of research grants, teaching courses, and other responsibilities, is not conducive to entrepreneurial success. New initiatives aiming for sustainability require fully dedicated, fully invested, and intensely focused leadership. If a principal investigator cannot provide it, he or she will have to retain a very capable person who can. (Page 7)

This is the second time in a week or so I have heard people calling for the professionalization of academic resource development (the other time being at the Tools for Data-Driven Research meeting where the view was voiced that tool development should be taken out of the hands of the academics.) Reading the report I wonder what the role of academics in scholarly resources is, if any? It reminds me of calls for MBAs to run universities rather than academics. I wonder what it would look like to apply the logic of this report to the university itself (as a type of institution.) I think it fair to say that the university has clearly proven to be longer lasting (more sustainable) than commercial enterprises. For that matter ask how many software companies still exist ten years later (see my blog entry on In Search of Stupidity, over 20 years of high-tech marketing disasters). To be fair I think the report is looking at models for large-scale academic resources like online journals and other non-profit resource organizations that are often run by professional staff already.  Hereis a list of their major points:

1.  Most OAR projects should not assume ongoing support from initial funders.
2. Sustainability plans must include and provide for resources to support future growth.
3. OAR projects create value through the impact they have on users.
4. Projects should think in terms of building scale through partnerships, collaborations, mergers, and even acquisitions.
5. In a competitive world, strategic planning is imperative.
6. OAR leaders must see both the needs of users and the competitive environment as dynamic and constantly changing.
7. OAR leaders must become fully accountable both to their projects and to their funders.
8. Catalysing a dynamic environment for agility, creativity, risk-taking, and innovation is imperative.

While I am skeptical of the entrepreneurial thinking the report starts with we can learn from these points about sustainability by looking at the issue from an entrepreneurial perspective still stands. We can and should think about the long term sustainability and we can learn from other perspectives.

The really useful part of the report is “Section 4: Revenue Generating Options for OAR  Projects” which systematically discusses direct and indirect ways of generating revenue including the much avoided approach of allowing ads into academic sites.

The sad story of Brandon Crisp and his parents is over. The Globe and Mail reports that an Autopsy shows Brandon Crisp died from fall. Brandon had run away from home after his parents revoked his Xbox privileges after he had skipped school to play Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Microsoft got involved when they doubled the reward for information about Brandon’s whereabouts and shared information about his online team. His parents were afraid he was addicted to the game though the truth may be that he was caught in a network of obligations to team members with whom he played. As an article in Maclean’s puts it:

What they didn’t know at the time, his parents say, was just how much the game meant to their son and how troublesome that connection had become. Since his disappearance, the true extent of his involvement has become clear. While he had few friends in Barrie, his Xbox had a list of 200 people whom he played Call of Duty with online. Judged too small to keep up in hockey, the shy but competitive teenager found respect and success in the video game world, where he played on “clans,” or online teams. It wasn’t just a game, it was Brandon’s life — something he might even make money playing in professional tournaments one day, he once told a friend. “These are the things I didn’t realize,” says Steve, standing in a police command centre near where Brandon vanished, his hands wrapped around a bottle of water. “When I took his Xbox away, I took away his identity.” (What happened to Brandon? by Colin Campbell and Jonathon Gatehouse, Oct. 30, 2008)

The article mainly talks about the possibility that computer games are addictive and includes a response from the ESA that the media is “addicted” to such stories. The Escapist in response to Maclean’s has an editorial by Andy Chalk (sent to me by Calen) titled The Stigma of Normal which argues that the evidence of a connection between games and Brandon’s running away is scant.

Playing videogames in this day and age is no more remarkable than watching television or listening to music. Did he overindulge? Maybe, although we have only his parents’ word to that effect, and if he did, it would hardly be beyond the pale for teenage behavior anyway. Yet even though the only videogame connection to the case is the fact that he played them, it’s virtually impossible to see or read anything about his disappearance without the gaming angle being thrust in your face like the armored crotch of a victorious deathmatch opponent. (The Stigma of Normal, Andy Chalk, Nov. 5, 2008)

It seems to be both sides, the media and … the (gaming) media are addicted to each other and this issue. They both have their audience and play to them. How could the discussion around gaming mature?

In the category of “why didn’t I think of that” I recently discovered that there are alternative DNS roots. Domain name services are what resolve domain names like “theoreti.ca” into an actual IP Address. The available root names like .com, .ca and so on are limited and you can’t invent your own like “.rockwell” without paying a lot or convincing ICANN. That’s where alternative DNS root name servers come in. Obviously there are good reasons to not use alternative roots systems. As the Internet Architecture Board puts it in RFC 2826:

To remain a global network, the Internet requires the existence of a globally unique public name space. The DNS name space is a hierarchical name space derived from a single, globally unique root. This is a technical constraint inherent in the design of the DNS. RFC 2826: IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root

That said, Guy pointed me to a blog entry on Why I use my own DNS resolvers that explains why one might want to run your own DNS service (speed) and how you can then use OpenNIC root servers to resolve alternative names.

Yesterday I gave a talk at the Orion conference Powering Research and Innovation: A National Summit on a panel on Cyberinfrastructure on “Cyberinfrastructure in the Humanities: Back to Supercomputing.” Alas Michael Macy from Cornell, who was supposed to also talk didn’t make it. (It is always more interesting to hear others than yourself.) I was asked to try to summarize the humanities needs/perspectives on cyberinfrastructure for research which I did by pointing people to the ACLS Commission on Cyberinfrastructure report “Our Cultural Commonwealth.” One of the points worth making over an over is that we have a pretty good idea now what researchers in the humanities need as a base level of infrastructure (labs, servers and support). The interesting question is how our needs are evolving and I think that is what the Bamboo project is trying to document. Another way to put it is that research computing support units need strategies for handling the evolution of cyberinfrastructure. They need ways of knowing what infrastructure should be treated like a utility (and therefore be free, always on and funded by the institution) and what infrastructure should be funded through competitions, requests or not at all. We would all love to have everything before we thought of it, but institutions can’t afford expensive stuff no one needs. My hope for Bamboo is that it will develop a baseline of what researchers can be shown to need (and use) and then develop strategies for consensually evolving that baseline in ways that help support units. High Performance Computing access is a case in point as it is very expensive and what is available is usually structured for science research. How can we explore HPC in the humanities and how would we know when it is time to provide general access?

Peter sent me to Clay Shirky’s It’s Not Information Overload. It’s Filter Failure talk at the Web 2.0 Expo in New York which starts with a chart from a IDC White Paper showing the growth of digital information. His title summarizes his position on the issue of Information Overload, but on the way he made the point that we have been complaining about overload for a while. To paraphrase Shirky, “if the problem doesn’t go away it is a fact.” Shirky jokes that the issue comes up over an over because “it makes us feel better” about not getting anything done.

I, like others, have used the overload meme to start talks and am now wondering about the meme. Recently I was researching a talk for CaSTA 2008 that started from this issue of excess information and found that Vannevar Bush had used overload as the problem to drive his essay, “As We May Think” in 1945.

There is a growing mountain of research. But there is increased evidence that we are being bogged down today as specialization extends. The investigator is staggered by the findings and conclusions of thousands of other workers—conclusions which he cannot find time to grasp, much less to remember, as they appear. Yet specialization becomes increasingly necessary for progress, and the effort to bridge between disciplines is correspondingly superficial.

Professionally our methods of transmitting and reviewing the results of research are generations old and by now are totally inadequate for their purpose. (Vannevar Bush, As We May Think)

If Shirky is right that this is a fact, not a problem, and that we default to using it to leverage ideas as solutions, then we have to look again at the perception of overload. Some of the questions we might ask are:

1. What is the history of the perception of overload?
2. Is it something that can be solved or is it a like a philosophical problem that we return to informatics as a ground for discussion?
3. Have structural changes in how information is produced and consumed affected our perception as Shirky claims? (He talks about FaceBook being a structural change for which our balancing filtering mechanisms haven’t caught up.)
4. One common response in the academy is to call for less publishing (usually they call for more quality and less pressure on researchers to crank out books to get tenure.) Why doesn’t anyone listen (and stop writing?)
5. What role do academics play in the long term selection and filtering that shapes the record down to a canon?

NiCHE (Network in Canadian History & Environment) has a useful wiki called The Programming Historian by William Turkel and Alan MacEachern. The wiki is a “tutorial-style introduction to programming for practicing historians” but it is could also be used by textual scholars who want to be able to program their own tools. It takes you through learning and using Python for text processing for things like word frequencies and KWICs. It reminds me of Susan Hockey’s book, Snobol Programming for the Humanities. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985) which I loved at the time, even if I couldn’t find a Snobol interpreter for the Mac.

We need more of such books/wikis.

I just got back from the Tools For Data-Driven Scholarship meeting organized by MITH and the Centre for New Media and History. This meeting was funded by the NEH, NSF, and the IMLS and brought together tool developers, content providers (like museums and public libraries), and funders (NEH, JISC, Mellon, NSF and IMLS.) The goal was to imagine initiative(s) that could advance humanities tool development and connect tools better with audiences. I have written a Conference Report with my notes on the meeting. One of the interesting questions asked by a funder was “What do the developers really want?” It was unclear that developers really wanted some of the proposed solutions like a directory of tools or code repository. Three things the breakout group I was in came up with was:

• Recognition, credit and rewards for tool development - mechanisms to get academic credit for tool development. This could take the form of tool review, competitions, prizes or just citation when our tool is used. In other words we want attention.
• Long-term Funding so that tool development can be maintained. A lot of tool development takes place in grants that run out before the tool can really be tested and promoted to the community. In other words we want funding to continue tool development without constantly writing grants.
• Methods, Recipes, and Training that are documented that bring together tools in the context of humanities research practices. We want others with the outreach and writing skills to weave stories about their use to help introduce tools to others. In other words we want others to do the marketing of our tools.

A bunch of us sitting around after the meeting waiting for a plane had the usual debriefing about such meetings. What do they achieve even if they don’t lead to initiatives. From my perspective these meeting are useful in unexpected ways:

• You meet unexpected people and hear about tools that you didn’t know about. The social dimension is important to meetings organized by others that bring people together from different walks. I, for example, finally met William Turkle of Digital History Hacks.
• Reports are generated that can be used to argue for support without quoting yourself. There should be a report from this meeting.
• Ideas for initiatives are generated that can get started in unexpected ways. Questions emerge that you hadn’t thought of. For example, the question of audience (both for tools and for initiatives) came up over and over.

Lisa Young with the support of the Brown University Scholarly Technology Group (STG) has developed a Fortune of the Day - Fortune Hunting interactive art site based on a collection of scanned fortune cookie slips she created. It has elements of a public textuality site like the Dictionary though focused completely on fortunes. The interface is simple and elegant. I believe it has been exhibited recently for the first time. The project uses the TAPoRware Visual Collocator for one of its interfaces.