Futurism

So one thing I was thinking about lately was electronic devices and the effect they would have on society, and really what approach we as humans would have to information, what tools we would use to access information.

It seems to me like there are maybe three sets of devices that aren't going way. There is the large of screen, such as your television or a really large computer monitor or set of monitors. Perhaps large projection mechanisms such as movie screens. We are always going to want screens to view certain bits of information in a very large format, because sometimes we will just want that type of immersion experience. So that's not going anywhere. Then there are laptop devices, basically small portable screens with access to a variety of functions. And then the small handheld device, which is increasing taking on a whole plethora of functions, from phones to music storage to accessing the Internet. In ways it's more functional than a laptop, just be virtue of being smaller, and it can provide for most of the functions of a laptop. But pressing small buttons on a tiny screen would get maddening for any long-term, serious work. I can't imagine someone writing a novel or short story or computer code or term paper for hours on end on a tiny handheld device, or even watching certain types of videos with any degree of comfort. A laptop device with always be a necessity for a certain type of professional, although I can actually see certain classes opting to go without them for only the iphone device. And of course there might be some type of desire for a midsized device, like a kindle, something for the reading of long-format works, but that might just be a stop-gap device until people get over their cultural attachment to the codex form, and I can't see anyone opting for such a size when the other options allow for a greater variety of function and ease, especially if the mid-size device, like the kindle, remains confined to only a narrow range of uses. (Computers could be turned into cellphones as easily as cellphones have been turned into computers.)

So I think that those devices will remain around for quite some time. What I am curious about, though, it what the further advances will be made in terms of information access. I saw some video somewhere about some kind of wearable device that would give access to a whole array of information through the use of a camera around the neck. And what would happen if we finally developed technology that would allow a direct electronic chip, brain interface, like the kind of technology we see Neuromancer or the Matrix? Would we be able to download information, surf the Internet, write documents, answer phone calls, all inside our heads? How would this change our culture, the way we interact with information?

This would obviously require some form of surgery. So would our culture split between those who have access to external devices and those who have direct mental access to electronic processors, creating an additional class, capable of affording the elective surgery, creating a third class of technology users. William Gibson has said that the future is here, it just isn't spread out evenly. Right now there are those with access to electronic devices, and those too destitute to afford them. Then of course there are those that are that live without access to any form of electronic technology at all, your present day hunter-gatherers. I wonder how long they are for this world. I wonder, perhaps, if technology developed that allowed for such electronic/organic interfaces, if such technology is even possible (does the nature of human consciousness really allow for such a thing?) there might be some type of socio-political movement to make it widespread available, maybe to enforce government subsidization of the surgical process, so that it's existence doesn't lead the creation of an impermeable overclass, and not of political/economic movers and shakers, your Bush's, Clinton's, Senators, World Leaders and Businessmen, but an actual, leisure class in possession of advanced wealth and capabilities, more like Metropolis than any cyberpunk setting. I suppose it depends on how far along in social democratization we are. And I don't just mean in terms of the U.S., although it's possible we could have such split occur here too, especially if the technology occurs in a setting without Single Payer Healthcare or strong unionization, but in First World/Third World terms, too. I mean, I could see us having a West hardwired into the Internet at all times, completely against an East and South America that exists without such trappings, and thus getting continually outpaced in technology by leaps and bounds. What would such distance in wealth and information bring about? Is such a thing not already, happening? Would we see the widespread rejection of materialism, a move towards spiritual concerns? Contentment of being left out? Surely there would be those who would see the injustice of the situation, if not wanting to be hardwired, at least in terms of the material comfort such technologies, allowed (I can also see a rejection of such elective surgeries occurring among religious conservatives and animal rights activists, environmentalist, and the anti-corporate movement on the left*) and would respond with violence and terrorism, perhaps causing some kind of environmental, biological or nuclear catastrophe. That would set up your post-apocalyptic setting right there.

*I think Gibson actually portrayed such characters in "Johnny Mnemonic." And Neuromancer features evangelicals as terrorists.

Faucet

My biggest problem with writing, I think, it that I treat it too much like a sacrosanct endeavor, like some holy quest or ritual that must be set aside to be undertaken only at set times. I write something, and the whole time I am pushing towards conclusion, to bring the ritual to a solemn close, so I can cease the tension and breath easy.

It is like, I thought last night, like a faucet. I want to turn it on, and then turn it off, and do something else. But when I turn it off, it all just goes down the drain, and I have nothing left, and then I come back, and I have to turn it back on again, so I think, no, I will not use the water right now, wait for when the time is right. The water must be saved for when absolutely necessary. This is what I think especially with blog posts. They must be neat and orderly and when finished, I have done my job, and should do something else. But if I don't leave the water running, then it can't overflow, and I can't find my current, or carve my riverbed. I can't be a faucet, I need to be a gushing spring.

The Real Me

I can't write. I don't know how to write. When I'm writing, I feel like I have to trick myself. I have to pretend to be doing other things, like taking notes or making things up in my head, or just typing randomly whatever pops in there. When I like something that spins around in my head for a bit, whenever I try to set it down, it feels wrong, like a copy, and the real one exists somewhere else of in the ether. Notes just need to keep being refined and refined, and I never know when they are done. Whatever pops up as I type similarly lacks polish. When I try to writes something well, like sit down and really commit to writing something well, the first time, it is like trying to sigh-read a symphony for performance in front of 200 bodies. And they are all invisible. How nerve-racking is it to play for invisible people?

Last night, I was lying in bed and feeling blue, up late in the early morning after napping in the middle evening, and I had a head buzzing full of ideas and words that I was too tired to take down (besides the computer was off) and I was working on a story and liking it and feeling good before finally forcing myself to sleep, and then I woke up and my dream-mind was gone and it was boring old immobile me to greet me again, and I tried to write the words the way I thought they had to be written and it didn't work and I felt disheartened again, all over, just like I knew, while laying there on the other side, just as I knew I would be. The real me, or false me that sits in for me when I am awake and rested, just cannot do it. He is paralyzed and fearful. Perhaps the me that fades in in early morning waking hours when my body pulls towards sleep, perhaps he is only a phantom. Perhaps he is not as clever as he thinks he is, as he has convinced the rested mind to think he is. Perhaps what he thinks he thinks is clever just just a result of absent critical faculties, eaten up by dream logic. Perhaps there is no me that knows how to do this. But the glimpses, the feelings of fluency, they make me so happy, but the endless arid plains to wander through to reach the mirages, they are unbearable.

Dollhouse

So, I just watched the first episode on Hulu. It was quite good. Bullet points!

• The show seems to be set up for an overarching narrative, what with the leaking memories, and FBI agent on the agencies tail. Oh, and the naked dude at the end. This all seems to entail some kind of endpoint, like Lost or Prison Break, and that puts the show on shaky ground. Either the show reaches it's conclusion, and then can't end and sputters out, or the show continuously puts off it's conclusion, diluting the narrative. Does Whedon have a set number of years in mind. Does have an idea what cna happen after those years are done? Then again, maybe Whedon is just throwing in enough steps that he can pull the show towards a first-season conclusion, if it gets cancelled (a likely possibility). And he's good enough with U-turns that he can keep this thing going for longer than he originally planned. that FBI agent is as likely to get shot in the head as bust open the Dollhouse. Actually, probably more likely.
  
• It's great to see Eliza Dushku in something again. And Amy Acker. In fact, the cast in general seems really strong. I really like Olivia Williams, who seems to have found her character the fastest.
  
• The writing still seems a little off. Way to much vague ruminations concerning the show's themes. Let that stuff rise up naturally. Also, not enough quips. Although "Dude, it's like Five!" was pretty good.
  
• I am glad they didn't have echo kill someone in the first episode. They need to milk that when it happens.
  
• Long term questions: What is the deal with the scars on Acker's face, and does it have anything to do with the tech guy? What's the deal with the naked guy? Was that Echo's family? What did she join the Dollhouse to avoid? Will the FBI agent find them (yeah, probably)? How soon, and what happens when he does? Where will the flashes of memories come into play? Are they unique to Echo, or the result of a glitch in their system? If the FBI guy gets shot, will Echo be the one who does it?
  

Faces of Government

You know what's something that I find interesting? Over the last few years, I had next to no idea who was in the Bush Administration. I knew that Rice was at state, but I probably couldn't have told you who Robert Gates was, and I didn't know who Hank Paulson was until the crisis hit. I knew that Gonzales made a mockery of justice, but who was the guy after him? He fainted once, didn't he? Card was CoS, John Yoo was some evil Justice flunky. Bolton was briefly at the UN. Scooter Libby, Paul Wolfowitz, David Addington, Doug Feith. I remember the names but not the jobs. Ari, Scott, Tony (RIP), and Dana were the press secretaries. Scott fucking hated his job and the people he worked with. Oh! And Karl Rove! How could I forget Rove. Maybe I just wanted to.

That's a lot of names, now that I look at it, but most of them are vile flunkies, I have next to no idea who was running any of the agencies.

Now I know that Clinton, Gates, and Geithner are at the Big Three. Arne Duncan at HUD. Sen. Salazar at Interior. Peter Orzag at OMB. Eric Holder is finally Attorney General. Steven Chu is at Energy. Shinseki at Veteran affairs, with Tammy Duckworth as his deputy. Jim Jones is NSA. Leon Panetta is head of the CIA. Susan Rice is Ambassodor to the UN. HHS is empty, but it was going to be Daschle. Commerce was supposed to be Richardson, then Gregg (guess we'll never know if my theory was correct). Ray LaHood is at Transportation, and is Republican. Hilda Solis is finally on track to be Labor Secretary. Gibbs is our lone press secretary, though Bill Burton is his deputy. The advisors are Sam Power, Larry Summers, Axelrod, Valerie Jarret, Jared Bernstein at the VPs office. Melody Barnes coordinates domestic policy. Cass Sunnstein is working at some shadowy shit I can't remember. Volcker is overseeing the economic advisory board. Ray Lynch is or will be deputy to Gates. Rahmbo is CoS. Reggie Love is still the man's personal assistent. The hotspot envoys are George Mitchell and Richard Holbrooke. That's off the top of my head.

Now, maybe I am just more involved in paying attention to who's running what, but I think that it might actually be due to the way Obama is running things. In two ways. First, we hear about these people because they have actual responsbilities. They are trying to accomplish things. With Bush it didn't matter; none of them were meant to do their jobs anyways. Government doesn't work; why try. Who cares who they are, if they are just seat warmers? Now, these people have jobs to do, and if they are doing things, we hear about them.

Second, this is also part of Obama's promise to make government more open to the people. In order for it to be open, the people have to know who is running things. We should know who is running our government, and so there are press conferences to announce people. They are sworn in in public, with a nice speech to be with it (Favreau is head speechwriter!). They talk to the press and let people know what they are doing. In order for the people to be engaged, they need to be engaged. There needs to be faces to match with what is happening, or else government just becomes cold and distant. Faces give you someone to talk to, someone to follow, someone to get angry at, to write letters to. Maybe it gives you a team to root for. However it works, you can't have an active citizenry with an shadowy government, and you can't have a shadowy government if you know everyone's. Maybe it's just a product of the media environment, or maybe this is what change looks like.

Update: Shit, how did I forget Napolitano at Homeland Security?