RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Reputation’ Category

Genetic Crossings (ICM Final Project Presentation)

08 Dec

[see more documentation: proposal, part 2, part 1]

Focus

For Heather Dewey-Hagborg’s Intro to Computational Media class at NYU’s Interactive Telecommunications Program, I decided my final project would involve creating a simulation incorporating the traits of people, nations, and religions, creating offspring who are summations of their genetics and environments.

Processing is a great language for easily visualizing data.  I early on realized I wanted to make a visualization as a study for Galapag.us, my eventual thesis for developing a reputation and identity system that centralizes all the data you’ve ever created about yourself and what others say about you so that you can develop algorithms and formulas for evaluating and comparing your results with others.

Inspirations

Visually, I was interested in karyograms, Punnett squares, chromosome stainings, and representations of solar systems.

 

Application

The sketch initializes a world and fills it with 5 people to start off with, Albert Einstein and Gisele Bundchen, and 3 random individuals.  Time begins, with each pass of the draw() loop aggregated and calculated into a rough approximation of years in time.

People have innate traits and characteristics saved into variables: strength, intelligence, wisdom, charisma, stamina, wit, humor, education, creativity, responsibility, discipline, honesty, religiosity, entrepreneurialism, appearance, money, gracefulness, stress, health, luck, talent at math, talent at art, talent at sports, whether employed, happiness, nationality, religion.  They are on a scale from 1-10, with 1 implying the most negative state and 10 being the best. (e.g. poor health vs. superb health, ugly vs. gorgeous, a stressed-out person vs. a carefree one, etc.)

They are born into nationalities/regions: USA, UK, Africa, China, South America, with the traits security, innovation, job opportunity, immigration policy, life expectancy, education, sanitation, standard of living, pollution, biodiversity, crime, political freedom, and nutrition.

They have religions/ways of life: Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism, with the traits commercial, morality, hierarchy, and portability.

You can already see the terminology isn’t precise (nations vs. regions), and I’m missing tons of variables.  Had I more time to code in more negative effects, I would add personality traits like deception, violence, libido, etc.

God is in the sketch.  All people are connected with him.  He also has baller stats:

// who art in Heaven
  god = new Person(-1, 0, 0, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10,
    0, 0, 10, 0, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, "God", "null", -2, -2, -1, 0, -1, 0, 1, 1100, 600);

Every pass through draw(), it’s determined whether 1) there’s a potential match (via the flirt() function), matching a male and a female (sorry, I didn’t have time to code in adoption et al), 2) there’s chemistry, and 3) if so, then sex().  Chemistry() requires a degree of likeness in appearance, money, religiosity, and some other superficial requirements. Then again, there’s also the matingDance.beer() function, which I’m particularly proud of:

else if (matingDance.beer(flirter1, flirter2)) {}

Social lubrication — some of the basic requirements for chemistry are, um, degraded, leading to easier baby-making.  This is also good for preventing my sketch from not having enough chemistry to produce offspring between the people.

Women between ages 18 and 50-ish are fertile (I had to adjust the numbers so that the sketch would work throughout its duration instead of the whole civilization losing an ability to breed by becoming too old) and need at least 5 “years” or something between babies before they can have another child.

boolean checkFertile(int _flirter1, int _flirter2) {
    int female = 0;
    boolean fertile = false;
    if (person[_flirter1].gender == "female" && person[_flirter1].alive == true) {
      female = 1;
      if ((currentYear - person[_flirter1].lastBaby > gestationRate) &&
       (person[_flirter1].age >= 18) && (person[_flirter1].age = 18)) {
        fertile = true;
      }
    }
    else if (person[_flirter2].gender == "female" && person[_flirter1].alive == true) {
      female = 2;
      if ((currentYear - person[_flirter2].lastBaby > gestationRate) &&
       (person[_flirter2].age >= 18) && (person[_flirter2].age = 18)) {
        fertile = true;
      }
    }
    return fertile;
  }

Children are created through matingDance.punnettSquare() of their parents.  The parents’ traits are averaged together and then some mutation is introduced for variability in the children.  I think I coded it so some traits change more than others, and some don’t change at all.

People can reach somewhere around 65-ish before death becomes a regular reality.  Once people die, they are removed from the population size, which is capped at 40 — allowing another child to be born somewhere if there’s less than 40 people alive.  The maximum number for the duration of the sketch is 90 people, so if 40 people are dead, up to 50 others can be alive.  The sketch starts to slow down once there’s more and more computation via people objects.

The orange-yellow buttons toggle between the main universe-like view and another view, which contains system stats and karyogram-like views of each person’s traits.  The traits are displayed as circles, with their sizes representing the size of the traits.

I made some formulas (or evolutions, as I call them) for actual vs. potential well-being.  This computes someone’s traits as he is born with, and after they are adjusted for quality of the nation and his religion.  This is then divided by the maximum well-being one could have in the same religion and nation.  Thus you get a ratio of actual vs. potential.  The goal is to bring these numbers as close together as possible, to see if a society is running at full efficiency.

In my fairly generous, unscientific, unsystematic world, people are STILL running far below efficiency.  The best of human achievement is squandered daily, not just by peoples’ own personalities and time constraints, but by poor maximization policy and by inflexible religious traditions.

I also coded in a happiness evolution:

int happiness(int i) {
    int happiness = person[i].health + person[i].money + person[i].stress + person[i].creativity + person[i].religiosity +
    round(nation[person[i].nationality].standardOfLiving / 10) + round(nation[person[i].nationality].pollution / 10) +
    round(nation[person[i].nationality].security / 10) + round(nation[person[i].nationality].crime / 10) + person[i].employed * 10;
    return happiness;
}

This computes someone’s happiness based on personal health, stress levels, creativity, religiosity, and his nation’s standard of living, pollution levels, national security, crime levels, etc.  It also relies on whether someone is employed or not.  Obviously this evolution needs a ton of work and far more variables.

My "EUDAIMONIA" Tattoo

The happiness metric and the actual/potential well-being ratio are key metrics that I want to spend more time nailing down.  I think these metrics are chasing Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia, which I also have tattooed on my arm.  There’s more to life than money.  There’s all these other variables.  It could be said we are happiest (in a bigger sense) when we feel we are running at our maximum potential and can contribute to the world.  We need to be able to measure this and push it down to the individual level, so people can make better choices towards bettering themselves, and up to government level, so policymakers can make better policy to maximize a nation’s human and social capital.

Download/View

The code is too long to post here, but here’s a direct .txt link to the source .pde (w/ combined classes).  You can go see the sketch running at OpenProcessing.org!  Only thing about that is that it will run in a reduced-size window.  You can try to view the Mac .app version or the Windows .exe version, too.

The code is also now at Github.

Difficulties and Lessons Learned

I used a Hashtable at first, to try it out, but I quickly ran into limitations I didn’t know how to get around.  I would use pretty length functions to recast strings as integers and vice versa, and so on.  Eventually I got so pissed that I rewrote a lot of the code and Person classes so that everything was saved as an integer and then I could look up its “name” in a table via a function.  So the nations are coded as 0-5 or whatever, with 1 equaling the UK, etc.  Much easier to manipulate.  It also meant I could use the ID integer with arrays.

My code got long and complex quickly, so I had to split everything up into classes, just for organization’s sake:  Death, DrawFuncs, Evolutions, GetFuncs, MatingDance, Nation, Person, Religion.   I don’t think at this level of sophistication, I could really build more objects into the sketch.  I wanted to practice inheritance and polymorphism stuff but it didn’t come up.  Any ideas for refactoring?

I really hated recasting strings and integers.

I want to spend more time coding on happiness and actuality vs. potentiality.  What I learned was that you have to build a really large system sandbox before you can begin to tackle those metrics.  This includes modeling and simulating an environment to such a degree that it can begin to calculate and visualize your concept of what happiness is, since it pulls from so many dimensions of one’s life. (not just money, but also charity, family life, employment, etc.)

Ways to Expand

Still want to use real-time data from Galapag.us, fed in from its database into Processing.  Too much to do right now though.  I’d have to redesign my database as well as fix the sketch variables!

The algorithms and equations need a lot of tweaking to be more realistic.  For Galapag.us, I’m hoping to crowdsource algorithms for the most accurate ways to calculate somewhat qualitative figures.

I wanted to be able to introduce outside shocks (natural disasters, etc.) into the system, to see how it would affect various nations and personality types, to see who would be more resilient.

I would like to give random people innate superpowers or traits that are unique or very rare.  So that maybe when they turn 30, something is unlocked within them.  I guess I could also give them random diseases and genetic predispositions.

Conclusion

This project helped me get pretty solid on classes and functions and how to organize a sketch.  If I were to rewrite this, it would be far cleaner and more compact.  Mostly I’m appreciative of how much work it takes just to get to a level where you can start doing interesting network effects on large systems.  I barely scratched the surface, in about 1,590 lines of code, but I did manage to achieve perhaps 90% of the infrastructure that I hoped to build.  All of this helps me build a better reputation and identity system for Galapag.us and for my thesis.  I’m hoping the more solid I get on the infrastructure, the bigger breakthroughs I will have on the algorithms and crowdsourcing enablers that will be at the heart of Galapag.us.

 

Eudaimonia Versus Existing in a Childproofed Society

10 Aug

We live within a culture where negative feedback is purposefully avoided.  You can’t “dislike” on Facebook, you can only “+1″ on Google+.  Yelp was rumored to have strong-armed companies into paying to get rid of bad reviews.  Online sites like Consumerist are attacked by businesses who claim they’re unfair.  Most companies purposefully hide their contact numbers on their sites so you can’t easily call them (because if you’re calling, you probably have a problem with them!), you can’t cancel service on a web site and usually have to call, people avoid conflict and argument, companies set up complex levels of firewalls to prevent angry customers from getting anywhere, etc.

It goes further.  The world’s standard for measuring national improvement is Gross Domestic Product, which only tracks consumption in a very crude way.  Simon Kuznets, one of the architects of the GNP metric, admitted, “The welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income… Goals for “more” growth should specify of what and for what.”  But this forewarning was ignored.  If someone gets cancer and has to purchase a bunch of equipment and pills and spend money in the hospital, this is counted as a net positive for society because of the purchases, even if all these resources are being spent on one person who is unable to contribute to society while sick.  The U.S. government (!) is protesting credit rating agencies’ assessment of its indebtedness, where both the U.S. government has been profligate and the agencies have been corrupt in currying favor with the U.S. one moment and then trashing it the next.

The stock market, currently in shambles within the last few weeks, has scared nations yet again after a shock only three years ago.  Predictably, the Greek government, which has watched its economy grind to a halt and reach almost-default levels, has decided to ban short-selling of stocks for two months.  This is essentially an ideological move.  Short-selling, where you make money by betting on a stock going DOWN, not up, has always been seen by non-market people as, in varying degrees, dastardly, unpatriotic, illegal, and even dangerous.  It’s that last point regulators focus on.  They believe that short sales by people who hate a company can drive a stock to zero.  Meanwhile, market folks know that short selling actually adds more transparency, information, and support to stock prices, because there will be pressures pushing the stocks both up AND down, and not just up.  The problem in a market without short sellers is that without them, when buyers disappear, prices collapse completely.  No short sellers would be covering their positions.

And this says something else about markets.  Very few people actually understand how they work.  Virtually all the mainstream articles being written about the latest downturn are just flat out WRONG.  You’ll get guys like this, who tell you to stay in the market so you don’t risk the upside (again, it’s always about things going up).  He goes on in another piece to say that Wall Street is irrelevant!  The Daily Beast, usually a pretty savvy digest of the most important stories, has turned to mush when it comes to the markets.  Otherwise very intelligent people I follow online also have very flawed notions of how the markets work.  The lack of economic understanding is frightening when you consider that these people probably know a little bit more than the politicians elected to vote on policy for government role in the economy.

I’d prefer to read people like George Friedman, who emphasizes that it is not just economy, but political economy, that we must talk about.  Politics and the relations between power groups affects most of the dynamics in our lives, and we cannot act like the economy is some neutral entity that is impervious to human mistakes and designs.  The “economy” is intimately wrapped within the designs of men.

I had to quit watching the daytrading IRC channels because even those high-frequency traders had what was basically a cynical Ayn Rand-ish slash Gordon Gekko slash Snake Plissken view of the world where you’re only successful if you cut others’ throats to get to where you are.  Their adaptability to changing market conditions was highly questionable.  Basic economic principles were ignored.  But hey, they made good money so I can’t complain too much.

I would agree with Richard Florida (PDF), Umair Haque, Tim O’Reilly, and some others that we are in the very early, ugly stages of a transition to an eudaimonia society, from a purely consumerist society.  I believe that we need to be able to take an honest look at how our society is structured and allow for more negativity in our metrics.  We need to develop the capacity to take criticism, to be voted down, to be shamed when we do things that are wrong (a concept crudely and devastatingly wielded mostly by religion), to take a more holistic look at everything impacting our lives.  Pure revenue should mean less if it comes at the cost of environmental degradation, pollution, lack of time at home raising families, lack of sleep, abuse from employers or manipulation from unions, etc.

Eudaimonia is a term fit only for us classicists, but @'s concept of the economics of the good life is spot on http://bit.ly/l25koR
@timoreilly
Tim O'Reilly

Umair Haque:

“I believe the quantum leap from opulence to eudaimonia is going to be the biggest, most significant economic shift of the next decade, and perhaps beyond: of our lifetimes. We’re not just on the cusp of, but smack in the middle of nothing less than a series of revolutions, aimed squarely at the trembling status quo (financial, political, social): new values, mindsets, and behaviors, fundamentally redesigned political, social, economic, and financial institutions; nothing less than reweaving the warp and weft of not just the way we live–but why we live, work, and play.”

The goal is for people to be able to pursue middle-class professions in fields that they are talented at, to unlock their creative potential, instead of shoe-horning people into certain professions if they want to live any kind of decent lives for themselves.  The goal is for people to have a successful career but also a family to raise, a community to participate in, and a healthy life.  The way society is constructed now, as I’ve said before, is a zero-sum kind of get-rich-or-die-tryin’ mentality where everyone is incentivized to fuck everyone else over, at least until one becomes wealthy enough to think about maybe working on philantropy for others.

My "EUDAIMONIA" Tattoo

Instead of just Gross Domestic Product, people like Mark Anielski (“The Economics of Happiness: Building Genuine Wealth”) recommend the Genuine Progress Index, or the GPIAtlantic.  The GPIAtlantic was broken down into these indicators:

  • Time Use
    Value of Civic and Voluntary Work, Value of Unpaid Housework and Child Care, Value of Leisure Time, Paid Work Hours
  • Living Standards
    Income and its Distribution, Financial Security – Debt and Assets, Economic Security Index
  • Natural Capital
    Soils & Agriculture, Forests, Fisheries and Marine Resources, Energy, Air, Water
  • Human Impact on the Environment
    Solid Waste, Ecological Footprint, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Transportation
  • Human and Social Capital
    Population Health, Costs of Crime, Educational Attainment

These indicators are far more in line with how we actually consider the world subjectively.  They capture our concerns, worries, and understanding of how much we feel safe living in our communities.  But all of the factors are ignored in the top-line metrics that we use.

Which is sad because we live in an era now of big data.  The top quants in the nation are working in finance, insurance, computer science, crypto.  Yet the metrics we use for our own well-being and happiness are crude “neutral” measurements from another century.

The above chart shows the disparity between how the U.S. economy is measured through GDP versus how it is in actuality.  In short, we have hit a plateau in our quality of life for almost 60 years, while our GDP measurement seems to indicate we’re much “richer” per capita.  It coincides with increasing income inequality, measured through the Gini coefficient:

They show that our society as a whole probably peaked in overall access to happiness somewhere in 1968.

In short, we have insulated ourselves from seeing the negative aspects of our society.  Amartya Sen calls this phenomenon “hedonic opulence”, Anielski calls it “chrematistics”, Clive Hamilton calls it “affluenza”.  We believe that we can grow our way out of poverty, that if we have enough positives in a society, that we can just overwhelm the negatives.  But the truth is that the negatives impact the bottom line of growth and positivity.  A community full of pollution and crime will stop creative processes from flourishing there.  A sick populace will be less productive at work, impacting overall economic success.

Said Robert Kennedy on March 18, 1968, at the University of Kansas:

“Too much and too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our Gross National Product [GNP]… – if we should judge America by that – …counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities…. Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”

This is why I want to work on Galapag.us as my life project.  It is an ecosystem for reputation.  All the things you’ve worked on in your life are aggregated into metrics of your own design.  The most popular metrics (say, success at being a contributor to your community, looking at data such as your volunteer work, church life, money donated, time spent tutoring other people or children, household income, trustworthiness, crime record, etc.) would be voted up to the top.  We would not be constrained to just GDP.  We could build our own metrics.  Then those local, individual metrics could be aggregated for county level, state level, all the way up to national level.  The data is anonymized as it is grouped, or, if you choose, fully identifiable and open if you are an open person.

The imperative, though, must be on more transparency and accountability.  If we as individuals can’t handle being criticized publicly, then we can’t expect things to improve at higher levels of organization.  Being criticized is not always a bad thing.  If the criticism is fair, you should improve yourself with it.  If it is unfair, your detractor should be penalized for making false statements.  We do not have this kind of global feedback system in place.  We are victim to flash mobs, anonymous attackers, stalkers, people who suffer no negative feedback from their actions.  Galapag.us would fill this hole in the internet’s identity layer while still providing degrees of anonymity, pseudonymity, and identity.

Daniel Suarez’s seminal but overlooked books, Daemon and Freedom (TM), suggest deprogramming the “Non-Player Character”/NPC dynamic of being trapped within a world of simplistic metrics (the quotes below are from Freedom (TM):

“What do we look like to a computer algorithm, Sergeant? Because it will be computer algorithms that make life-changing decisions about these people based on this data. How about credit worthiness—as decided by some arbitrary algorithm no one has a right to question?”

“Imagine how easily you could change the course of someone’s life by changing this data? But that’s control, isn’t it? In fact, you don’t even need to be human to exert power over these people. That’s why the Daemon spread so fast.”

Suarez’s books propose that darknet hacker communities will spring up in the rural areas, away from legal restraints and the encroachment of lawyers, corporations, and other barriers to entry, creating more balanced, sustainable, networked communities for people to be rewarded at their individual trades by leveling up in the darknet world and then using darknet credits to earn a reputation and a living.

“Holons are the geographic structure of the darknet. Any darknet community lies at the center of an economic radius of one hundred miles for its key inputs and outputs—food, energy, health care, and building materials. Balancing inputs and outputs within that circle is the goal. A local economy that’s as self-sufficient as possible while still being part of a cultural whole—a holon—thus creating a resilient civilization that has no central points of failure. And which through its very structure promotes democracy. That’s what we’re doing here, Sergeant.”

“The Daemon financed this.” Sebeck turned to her. “Didn’t it?” “The Daemon’s economy is powered by darknet credits, Sergeant. Imaginary credits are all that money is.” “But there’s a theft at the heart of it.” She thought about it and nodded slightly. “Yes, the darknet economy was seeded by real world wealth. Wealth that was questionable in origin to begin with. Here, it’s being invested in people and projects that have begun to return value—not in dollars, but in things of intrinsic human worth. Energy, information, food, shelter.”

There are ways out of the messes we’re in, but most people see them as unconnected issues.  But personally I see it as symptomatic of an entire society’s failure to examine itself.  Gnowthi seauton.  Jared Diamond-type stuff.  Granted, it would be a LOT to expect humankind to be able to look at itself honestly, for humans always hope to avoid the negative and only see the good in the things they believe in, but this would be one of those points where one would hope that our civic leaders and politicians would be required to study — and therefore detect — such policy/societal failures and properly diagnose them.

Unfortunately, that is not the ruling class that we have, and we are not likely to correct these systems until an alternative system is built.  Those who make money under the current system will resist, but even politicians go along with something when it’s shown to be successful.  Hopefully for me it would be something like Galapag.us, but I would accept any attempts.

The only way to change our systematic problems is to build our own alternative.

 

Moments

30 Jul

When I think about how poor my memory is, I know that there is a lot I’m just going to forget, not because I just don’t care or think it’s unimportant, but because 1) I’m a guy and 2) I don’t remember details so much as impressions and also how to find those details again.  The internet is becoming our collective mental hard drive.  It’s far better at storing data for individual long-term memories as well as for shared memories (what we might called culture transmission and shared knowledge).  This off-loading of long-term memory from our brains means our short-term mental RAM can become sharper.

Still, we’re human.  We remember certain experiences with the utmost vividness, even decades afterwards.  Whether they are traumatic or pleasurable inflection points, they profoundly affect our characters.  Just think about your relationship with someone close to you.  Perhaps you will remember impressions of many days spent together, but you will remember certain key moments down to how the air smelled or what song you were listening to.  The rest sort of fades away.

This is our passion and our personality.  The way we react intuitively and immediately to certain situations.  Highly dependent on our most vivid memories of something similar.

Yet, all that discarded memory can be important too.  Certain memories may strike you differently and more profoundly at some other point in your life.  But since it wasn’t relevant at the time, maybe you forgot it.

One project I’d like to work on is reproducing the magic of a moment digitally, whether it’s the profound or not so profound.

The profound is easy.  You would want to remember your first kiss.  You would want to remember how you felt and looked when you graduated from something.  You would like to see the looks on your family’s faces when they were so happy with something you’d done.

Certainly an age of everyone recording videos of each other is coming.  It leads to accountability, transparency, and reviewability, among other things.  If you’re not recording, everyone else will be.  Once cameras become cheaper and more ubiquitous, this is inevitable.

But what I want to do is create new moments.  Say you want to create a moment for your girlfriend who lives a long way away.  You’ll likely not see her for a while.  You can write a letter or email, or send a gift, sure.  But it’s not quite a shared experience.  It’s a one-way communication in many ways.

I would like the ability to create something like a moment quest.  I would let her know that she has a moment quest ready for her.  In order to receive the message or gift or news that I want to give her, she will have to complete a series of actions or mini-quests in order to unlock the moment made especially for her.  Perhaps the tasks are shared tasks that you do online together.  Or they require both of you to complete.  At any rate, the quest is something the two of you shared together, and thus, when the reward comes at the end, the reward is fused with the journey taken to receive it.  This is a moment.

You can craft better moments.  Ones that incorporate story-writing, taking photos, sharing sights and smells and thoughts, ones that require going out to complete mini-quests like going to four sushi joints.  Ones that require you to talk to your mom and dad first.  Ones that send you on a scavenger hunt or a digital Odyssean quest.

There’s even the story about the wedding gift a man made for his newlywed friends which consisted of a locked box that had a button on it.  The box said the newlywed couple would have 50 presses of the button to figure out how to open it, or it’d stay closed forever.  Pressing the button would give simply a distance to the target, and the number of remaining guesses.  So the box had a GPS unit in it, and it was telling the couple how far they were away from a location which, when the box detected it, would presumably open the box.  It turns out the box was on some charming island where the man had first started having feelings for the woman.  A great wedding gift.

I don’t accept the divide people make between the digital world and the “real” world.  The two are converging.  History in the future will show an intimate relationship between the two — you’ll have to interact in both worlds to do many jobs, I’m sure of it.  What if we could move past bias against one type of world, and just create more quality moments with those we care about?

When we’re on our deathbeds, aren’t those quality moments all we’re going to really care about?

 

Moved My Reputation Research Blog Posts Here

30 Jul

I’ve migrated my reputation research blog into this blog to make things easier.  A lot of my stuff is blending together, personal life and reputation, so it’s harder to decide whether a post should go under this blog or that blog, so I’m moving over. :)

The posts here are now on my main blog under the “Reputation” category.

 
 

My Goals for NYU’s ITP Program

07 Jun

I’m really excited to be starting my Master’s in Professional Studies program at New York University for the Interactive Telecommunications Program in August. In a way, it’s a true culmination of all the things I’ve been doing on my own OUTSIDE of school for so long. BBS‘ing and Sierra Networking in high school, telnetting and MUDding and daytrading and webdesigning in college, blogging and searching in the Army, coding a bit at Georgetown. Not really finding folks who found value in doing anything technical in any of those tribes.

I don’t know how this program will end up, but given that it’s throwing people headfirst into Arduino circuitboards, coding, hacking, social media remixing, designing, creating…I’m hoping to find peers who love to experiment and play and make.

Having seen various sectors of the American economy while living in CA/DC/TN/TX/IZ, particularly the knowledge economy, what I’ve been struck by most has been the lack of technical knowledge. People know their tiny sliver of the world, such as collateralized debt obligations, US-Pakistan policy, aid packages, writing reports…but anything broader than that knowledge is usually treading on very delicate ground. Even in some of the more technical areas I’ve worked in (military intel, social media, innovation projects), there is literally no knowledge of or curiosity for experimentation or remixing.

When I see people who don’t tweet or blog or have much of a presence online, particularly when they claim to be pretty digitally savvy, it makes me wonder. Twitter is all about remixing ideas, combining cultures and taboos and tribes. It’s a swirl of information waiting to produce the next memes or companies or news or collaborative one-offs. To me, not only is this environment fascinating, versatile, and by its nature educational, it also is a cauldron for the next generation of successful projects and people. It’s a testing ground for future successful workers. How can you compete in the working environment if you can’t keep up digitally? I understand if you don’t like computers or the internet, but it’s your own livelihood.

About a year ago, before I applied or even knew what I was going to do, I quit my job for 2.5 months. I got to enjoy the DC summer, but mainly I was coding full-time for my personal project, Galapag.us, having no clue where it would go or how it would ever be more than just a dumb idea. But I was super-frustrated with where my career was going. I wanted to build, to create, to do more with my hands. I think I called several family members and friends looking for advice. I ended up applying for ITP (and nowhere else), shelving Galapag.us for a bit, and returning to work. In April I found out I got in.

The way I see it, heading to NYC, the most creative, diverse, urban, and pragmatic city in the world (I’d argue), to finally be a true geek, I can only see this as a huge personal victory, a huge opportunity to be myself and to create a lot of great things that are useful to a lot of people.

And since I’m older this time around, and have an international development/international affairs Master’s under my belt from the best IR school in the world, this time I know I should have a plan of attack.

Galapag.us

Galapag.us is what I’d like to be my life’s work.  It’s what I want to be known for.  An open reputation system providing alternative forms of credit and trust, verified through a balance of different interests, using all your life’s data to compute what kind of person you are.

I want my projects to all work on some aspect of Galapag.us, to test its weaknesses and experiment with what it could eventually look like or become.

 

Prototype Glasses with Visual Augmentation for Reputation

To that end, I want to build the glasses used in Daniel Suarez’s Daemon and Freedom (TM).  Regular-looking glasses that you put on, plugging you into digital layers that show reputational score layers next to someone’s image, route planning towards your next objective, visuals of your level and trade (Level 19 Farmer, Level 3 Government Analyst, etc.) and others, digital inventories you can use with real-world objects, etc.  Augmented reality is being worked on at the platform level, but I’d like to build a functional prototype of some sort (PDF).

Prototype Location-Aware RFID Organizer Bins and Objects

Cory Doctorow’s Makers had his two tinkerers create a cheap and easy tech that consisted of RFID chips in containers and on objects, so that when you needed to locate something in your closet, you could call it up and the container it was in would glow for you so you could find it faster.  RFID and its intermixing with IPv6, linked data, and object reputation will lead to greater connectedness between the digital and real world, and will enhance our ability to interact with the real by mapping the computational digital world onto it.  It’s pretty kludgy the way we look at a real-world object (a book) and then google or amazon it online.

Video Editing

We have already reached textual literacy on the internet.  To the extent that we can remix and reuse text without violating the horrible, innovation-choking copyright laws that currently exist, we’re actually pretty good at finding, searching, and sharing text.  With bandwidth and storage and access increasing for video, we will need to reach video literacy next.  I already know that my posting a video will have far fewer hits than if I post just text.  Many people don’t want to watch a long video, or are at work and are blocked from YouTube.  But once a video goes viral, it has far more of an impact.  I would like to capture some sort of Marshall McLuhanesque understanding of video and get smart on video, Final Cut Pro, AfterEffects.  Video editing I see similar to web design — it’s a way to create and express your own view of the world without relying on others to make it for you.  And now that video is social and allows for feedback, through perhaps the most important tech given to us after the dotcom revolution besides Google (no, not Twitter or Facebook), YouTube:

YouTube Preview Image

Music Creation

Instead of being a guy on his night out at the club, I always wanted to own the club, or be playing the music for the club.  While I have no musical ability, I think I’ve at least accumulated enough knowledge from a broad enough swath of songs to be able to start mixing them together.  The tools for music creation, however, are somewhat arcane.  I want to get more comfortable with it.  Out of my straight-laced DC policy/analyst friends, I have seen their better parts/personalities emerge only when drunk and on the dance floor.  That is the power of music and communitas with alcohol and Cee Lo Green-revealed magic of Friday and Saturday night.

YouTube Preview Image

Miscellany

I have a few other projects I want to prototype.

ProbablyGonna. DC culture consists of a bunch of people who live in the District and want to go to happy hours/networking events EVERY NIGHT.  I came to DC and went immediately to Georgetown, so I had a built-in group of friends to hang with.  I have a feeling people in DC have a bunch of different circles and tribes they hang with, so the best way to meet up is not necessarily blast e-mails or FourSquare checkins.  What might work best is you signaling your intent to go out on certain nights on the calendar.  Say you want to have a night of clubbing on Friday night, until late, and maybe you want to do Adams Morgan.  You signal that on ProbablyGonna (as in, I’m probably gonna do this on Friday), and anyone else connected with you can signal their intent to do the same.  It’s not mutually exclusive to other events, so you could signal for multiple events.  This solves the FourSquare problem of knowing someone is at a location after they’re there, or in most cases, long after they’ve left.

Men’s tailoring. Most men do not know how to dress.  They certainly don’t own the essentials, the basics, for different social events.  What if you go to a site, select that you want a “business casual” outfit for work, enter your rough dimensions, and order a pretty basic outfit of a suit, shirt, starter tie, socks, shoes, underwear, belt, cufflinks, watch?  Then that kit either goes to a local tailor working with my company, or it goes to you and you schedule your time with the tailor later.  The tailor establishes a personal relationship with you and zeroes in your dimensions for the clothing.  The tailor then mends your kit, and gives you a business casual basic outfit that actually fits you, flatters your shape, and is worth far more than a regular tailoring job.  The best part?  Over time, your purchases get better.  Different outfits (going out Friday, wedding, weekend wear) go straight to the tailor, who tailors your kit, then gives it over to you.  It helps you dress far better for your body shape, it helps the tailor develop clients, it helps my company move product.  Then I can also sell you your pieces of personality, usually in the tie, the socks, shoes, kerchief, etc.

Reputation badges for your outfits:  piggy-backing on Galapag.us. You unlock badges that you wear on your clothing or bags when you go out.  They have QR codes or some other unique form of code (e.g. Itizen TRACKit).  Say you’re an excellent wingman and have saved three mates.  You get a wingman badge with two oakleaf clusters.  Or you know CPR.  You get a CPR tab (designates a skill, not an accomplishment).  Designated driver?  Badge.  This mirrors the military uniform system of achievements.  Clothing subconsciously is used to denote class, personality, and tribal association, but we’ve lost individuation and accomplishment that Papua New Guinea and Maori and other tribes used tattoos for, or Roman colors for their togas.  I want to bring that back.  Using Galapag.us’s reputation system as the backend and standardization platform.

So in short I want to play with things.  I don’t expect to get good at any one thing.  I’m not sure I will be very good at 3D printing or laser cutting or making actual models of things, having no prior design background, but I’ll give it a shot.

Setting the Tone

Those are the actual products.  Mostly what I want to do is create things that are useful and happy.  Two of the biggest problems among Internet-Americans is that they 1) have no clue how to make tech that benefits the poor, weak, and under-represented, and 2) they get too cynical or unhappy.  Fortunately NYC is taking on the personality of a digital city, thanks to Mayor Bloomberg and his efforts to push the city online, including appointing a Chief Digital Officer, Rachel Sterne.  As for me, I’ve realized how happiness and laughter and fun make more of a difference in peoples’ everyday lives than being sarcastic, sardonic, cynical, pessimistic, or mean.  While I’m sarcastic and dark in my humor, I want to try being happy.  I want to make peoples’ lives better and happier.  I want to stay away from the easy, which is being critical, doubtful, and resentful, while at the same time being pragmatic, useful, and iconoclastic.

So that’s what I want out of the next two years.  Hold me accountable to it.

 

Accountability

06 Dec

When people talk about Wikileaks and transparency, I think what they mean to talk about is accountability.

The US government and other organizations did not choose to release this info.  They did not choose to say in public the same thing they say in private, and to allow the public to see within to verify this.  What Wikileaks is doing is holding the various actors involved in its leaks accountable for what they say in private.  It is disrupting the actions done in secret by outing them, as one essay by zunguzungu, much re-tweeted and linked to online in the past week, explains.

Are the Wikileaks cables damaging?  I believe in a free and open society for the United States, and I believe the Wikileaks dump would be far more devastating to a closed government.

Such leaks do not necessarily change the power structure that already exists; the United States is still the global hegemon, China would still retain an authoritarian government that sought “harmony” instead of the “chaos” of democracy, and geopolitics would still dominate, even if countries were found in a lie.

If anything, the public is far more informed.  Maybe the actors involved already knew the contents of the leaks.  But we as a whole now have no excuse for not knowing. (beyond being banned from reading them by our $employers)

Wikileaks would have far more devastating effects, for example, on corporations.  Evidence of fraud or murder or other crimes would bring legal repercussions in most countries, and other companies would quickly fill the gap and pillage the offending company’s brand and identity.

So also people have been asking if we should trust Wikileaks more than the government.  It’s the wrong way to look at things.  No one should always be trusted — what we should seek is an approximation of the truth, based on corroboration and reputation.  We can expect groups to always represent an issue in the light fairest to them.  Knowing this, why don’t we set up systems that allow multiple sides to share the information, present their case, and calculate the best approximation in the middle?

For example, if we know that the US government will say one thing, and a respected journalist says other thing, and Wikileaks says the government actually internally said another thing, and the target country said yet another thing, shouldn’t the best thing be to know all of these sides and figure out what the truth is likely to be?

What if, for elections, votes would go to different entities?  You go place your vote and it goes to the government, a government & voting rights watchdog, and the press?  If anyone’s numbers are off, then we know that someone was doing it wrong.  The different entities have different motivations for presenting their side of the truth.  It, ideally, is a balance of power.

Granted, different entities can be corrupted.  The journalist tribe has been successfully corrupted by government interests (or anti-government interests, in some cases), while its job should be to fact-check everyone else, as well as itself.  People often say the Supreme Court has become politicized and does not strictly adhere enough to what the original documents or the latest precedents say, being influenced by politics and other players instead.

But the more variety we have in the entities who have access to information, the more we can approximate what the truth is and figure out why the outliers had their numbers wrong.  Granted, these entities need to be authenticated, they should adhere to standards, etc., since a direct democratic system would leave us in a similar state as we currently have (where money dominates).

We can’t design perfect one-party systems like having one authority for verifying all votes or clearing all information for release.  There are always flaws.  Centrality draws those who seek to control it.

We also know from recent history that elections do not equal democracy, and also we’ve learned more about the mechanics of corruption.  We’ve learned how even the most ethical organizations can be corrupted into collusion or bribery or ideology.  We have the technology (encryption, cloud, bandwidth, software pliability) to be able to build multi-agent verification systems.

The reason it doesn’t happen is because we do not want it.  It also doesn’t happen, for the reason that people distrust openness and flee to privacy in the name of security.  Trying to remain invisible is not a viable strategy in a world where it’s becoming easier and easier to unearth your personal data, your shopping data, large intelligence caches, internal corporate memos, etc.  What we should do is not attempt security through obfuscation, but build in actual security measures instead of security theater.  What we should do is turn it all on its head, and trust in open accountability systems to keep each other honest.

 
 

Self-Aware Building Blocks

26 Sep

The internet of things is fast approaching.  It’s the idea that all objects will eventually be networked, if not to the internet then at least to contextually relevant networks to those objects.  We are still waiting for IPv6 to take off, giving trillions of objects unique IDs in our universe so we can refer to them, address to them, interact with them.  We are also waiting for a wireless protocol that will be more appropriate for a physical world that doesn’t want to be wired.  Wifi cards are cheaper and smaller now, but not quite cheap enough to be throw-aways.  WiMAX is still struggling with adoption, but at least it is competing with some other standards.  Also we can use RFID chips to poll objects, but that requires using a device that itself can be hooked up to the network.  That device is still tethered as well.

The good news there is that the FCC just announced its support for some finalized rules surrounding white spaces, meaning there will be some new unlicensed spectrum now for anyone to use without a permit.  I consider this to be a game changer.  We could see some new innovations now that all the devices crammed into the space where cordless phones and garage door openers fight over spectrum will have more room to play in.

So the pieces are being built.

I got to thinking about an idea that I first saw in Cory Doctorow’s book Makers, in which two inventor buddies convert to commercial scale an idea where RFID chips on objects are used to help people organize their stuff.  So when someone is looking for this or that object, the tub or bin it is placed in will glow a certain color to indicate where it is.  The idea is that the tub or bin knows that the object which was uniquely identified (or I guess you could even identify it by class of object or any other variable, including who it’s owned by) is inside itself.

When I went to NYC, I went to Toys ‘r Us and spent considerable time looking at their Lego sets.  I used to have a big garbage bag full of Legos as a kid, and I’d used to construct some pretty cool intergalactic warships or major military bases with them.  Now Lego pretty much sells complete sets to build certain objects, although you can still buy some tubs full of pieces that make a lot of noise as you scrounge around inside them looking for that piece you really want.  They should line those tubs with felt or something.

Anyway.  one thing I always worry about with jigsaws or board games or Legos is losing pieces.  Losing one makes the whole thing incomplete.  Obviously this is more important in board games or in a deck of cards.  But unless you have a lot of Lego sets, you won’t have spares.

So what if you could poll your Lego set and it would look for all its brother and sister pieces and report back a manifest to see which parts were missing, if any?

Now, what if you could be online and query your Lego collection to see if you have the parts to make someone else’s idea/recipe?  Is there something to be said for not having all the pieces, but finding a separate way to make it work?  What if you were required to build a Lego object in the real world, which upon its completion would let the internet know it was completed, thus unlocking achievements or imbuing that object with some digital power? (an idea from the book Daemon (TM))  So, say, you built a city block out of Lego (check out these awesome city sets that Lego has), it would unlock benefits to your digital neighborhood in an online game, like improved grocery logistics, less crime, more tax revenues, etc.  This melding of real world properties with digital properties is the future.

You’re going to have classrooms where kids for their homework will build things, which report the progress to other students and to the teacher online, where there’ll be both automated feedback and criticism/support from the peers and teacher.  Being online won’t be an idle thing like it mostly was for my generation (beyond building our own computers, soldering some things, etc.), because people will be building stuff to unlock things in the digital world.  And vice versa.  The two will interact.

There’ll be some more generic applications of self-aware building blocks too.  If a street light notices that its parts have been separated, it might be able to detect it was hit by a car and report that.  Grocery lists will report that you’re still missing an ingredient while you’re at the grocery store.  Maybe you’ll be like Indiana Jones, traveling the world to collect relics that, when placed in proximity with each other or used at a certain geographical site, will unlock a secret temple.  After all, one inventor using Arduino and GPS geolocation already made a wedding gift puzzle box that only opens when it’s taken to a small island near France.

Excited yet?

 
1 Comment

Posted in Reputation

 

NPC Archetypes & Reputation

15 Sep

I’m reading “Everyware:  The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing” by Adam Greenfield and he’s expertly thought and researched about the mediation of technology and cultural norms as a result of computers and sensors that exist in every object and medium in our lives.  He gets to talking about how designing the interface for a real-world system is full of fuzzy areas and uncertainties and multiple users, while up till now, most of our software takes it for granted that one user is readily identifiable (the source of the input it receives), has error-catching and ..else conditionals, etc.

He describes how the artifacts of the future meat/virtual space will have to discern our intentions based on the subtle cues that we give and receive through decades of social conditioning as a species.  Until then, the devices will continue to seem clumsy and feel nowhere close to passing a Turing test.

So I was thinking that maybe gaming will be the first area in which this kind of smart intuition will take place.  But even now, computer AI is retarded in games.  It is almost as if the AI is an afterthought for designers who are more interested in coding other aspects of a game.

It’s also probably a pain because the wheel gets reinvented each time.  Each game codes its own AI from scratch unless it licenses an engine, but even then, the designers still have to build the AI to their specific event.

And this got me thinking to another significant problem with any sort of project:  lack of crowdsourcing.  Why would people (particularly 1 or 2 developers) devote more time to things like AI which will only last as long as software is selling on Steam or in the stores?  Why invest in building a community or a feature if no one will use it after a few months?

So what if NPCs (non-player characters) and AI had a standard character set for use across disciplines, games, online user interfaces, etc.?  What if you built different archetypes of bots that could be tweaked for whatever project it was needed for?  What if the AI archetype’s behavior was networked?  That is, say someone meets a female paladin archetype in a Q&A forum for a company and interacts with it, and the results of that interaction are shared to all the other instances of that archetype in other settings (video games, online sexbots, car dashboard interface) so they can all learn specific lessons about interacting with humans?

This would mean they’d learn over time and be enduring archetypes that we want to interact with.  If one instance of a thief learns that it will get in trouble looking a little too suspicious in one online venue, it might disguise itself better in another setting (a multi-player RPG).  AI entities flagged as “tech support” or “Q&A” might collectively share their wisdom just because they are given that same descriptor of tech support.  Different AI entities belonging to “you” would all share your preferences.  Or not.  Maybe you want to have unique experiences and build bonds with them separately.

I don’t know.  I can just see a future where we will be interacting with bots a lot more, and we will expect those bots to have some continuity and to learn about us to make our lives better and easier.  And I think this will require some highly-networked AI pulling from tens of thousands of interactions with real humans to develop something truly useful — otherwise we’ll just have what we get now:  a bunch of throwaway code that barely accomplishes the task of discerning human intention.

 
 

Hot-Hand Theory

15 Sep

My friend MonkeyPope gave me the book “The House Advantage:  Playing the Odds to Win Big in Business” by Jeffrey Ma, knowing full well I’d love reading it.  Ma is one of the members of the MIT team that Ben Mezrich wrote about in “Bringing Down the House:  The Inside Story of Six MIT Students Who Took Vegas”, about a team that made a fortune off signalling and counting cards at casino blackjack tables.

One of my favorite discussions in The House Advantage was on hot-hand theory, the idea that people can go on streaks, or simply, that you are more likely to succeed this time because you succeeded the last time, a violation of statistical randomness in most situations.

I think we’ve all sensed that when we are watching a sporting event, sometimes one team may be losing but it’s outplaying the other team and has merely gotten some bad breaks.  Then that team blows it open in the second half and wins.  We’ve seen Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant line up for the shot at the buzzer, knowing they’ll make it.  We’ve seen Big Shot Bob or Derek Fisher take a 3 from the corner after a good ball rotation.  We’ve seen Favre and Elway lead their teams down the field at the end of the game, despite having a horrible rest of the game with no offensive movement.

What’s interesting is that people react to things wildly differently.  Some people see a disaster and run away from it or freeze up, while some charge forward into the fray to see if they can help.  Some athletes lose all their motivation after they’ve sealed a multi-million dollar contract.  Some seem to lose their hunger after they’ve won everything; just look at Roger Federer after he completed his career grand slam.  Some people would make a big shot or throw a nice pass and then feel like they didn’t deserve it, and they start missing the rest of their shots.  Some people always believe resolutely that they will make every shot, and so succeeding gives them even more confidence to feed off of.

These are microcosms of peoples’ larger personalities.  Some push harder when they win or lose, some relent.  Said Dr. John Eliot, by way of Jeffrey Ma, “One shot does not influence another shot.  One shot influences your psychology, and that psychology influences the next shot.”

There are some days when you go out to exercise and you just don’t feel up to it.  While you know how to do what you’re doing, your body doesn’t respond the way you need it to, no matter how much you’ve practiced.  Part of drilling is that your body starts to do certain tasks (like shooting a basketball) naturally or even mechanically, no matter how your mind, heart, or body feel.

There are other times when your legs feel like lead, but then you start making a couple shots and you snap into it.  Or you make a really nice shot and then your legs seem to give way the rest of the time, as your body ran out of juice.

Ma fortunately concludes nicely, saying, “It does a tremendous disservice to the statistics community as a whole if you walk into an audience with anyone who has played sports and champion the theory that there is no such thing as the hot hand. …  I believe that there are some shooters who at times become more confident due to early success, and this confidence leads to future success, that is, the hot hand.”

So how to build this into a real-world system?  You would need to take quantitative data about someone’s life within the context of his qualitative general mood, outlook on life, and typical response to pressure/success/failure.  Two people could have reached the same point but through vastly different ends of the extreme.  Like anything data-intensive, I guess, context is key.

Certainly we are not all just numbers, but shouldn’t we try to explore why and how we generate the numbers that we do?

 
 

Updates and Screenshots of Progress

05 Aug

So you may rightly ask what I’ve been working on since I left my full-time job to work on Galapag.us.

Basically, I’ve spent 3-8 hours a day pretty much converting what I’ve worked on into a more modular format in PHP, and I’ve had to learn jQuery, which has certainly made the prototyping and constructing the UX much faster and easier.

As you can see below, I envision Galapag.users being able to confirm or deny information that other people add to your profile.  There is a stream of updates that have been confirmed about you.

I haven’t consolidated the navigation or really spent a lot of time figuring out how a person would best use the site, so I’ve just been adding a lot of different entry points into menus for adding info about others.  I hate being on a web site that won’t let me interact exactly when I want to, instead of where it wants me to, and immediacy will be a key for Galapag.us both in providing less impulsively biased info and in collecting MORE data.

screenshot of main profile and addition menus

Below I was just playing with an autocomplete search/console box.

search/console autocomplete

Below is the “evolution sandbox”, where you can create new evolutions (or equations/formulae).  Basically all you have to do is click on the buttons for the variables you want to add, which then enter the variable into the text box below as a “dummy” variable.  That is, it’s (x * 1).  If x exists, then x = 1, so 1 * 1 is added to the final score.  You can of course change the 1 to whatever multiplier you want.  So if you had an SAT score of 600, you might set the multiplier to 0.2 so that 120 points are added to the final score.

I still need to add global variables.  So that your total # of books, the total # of users, etc. can be added.

Definitely I’m influenced by Pandora’s attempt to give individual songs “genomes”.  These are basically tags that help humans create taxonomies for finding things in the way that humans search:  I’m looking for an evolution that predicts good baseball ability, but someone else’s evolution they created may not include “baseball” in any part of the evolution, so tagging it will allow people to find it.

building evolution equations

Once an evolution has been saved, you can vote on it, and create a derivation (by “evolving” it).  It will spit out a total for you based on your own data, and also calculate the maximum number possible in that evolution, thus giving you a “rating”.

browsing evolutions

Here’s a menu that you can access through a mention of any other person’s name.  Still working it out but definitely I think that people will want to classify relationships with other people based on how public it is.  That is, if I’m attracted to some chick and we’ve only gone on a first date, my private status with her might be “sexual interest”, but publicly I may have her as “acquaintance” and between the both of us (bilateral), I may be a “friend”.

changing your interactions with another user

Obviously I’m still working on a lot of data entry-type stuff.  This is pretty tedious, making sure the user can interact with the backend.

I’d rather be working on some of the higher-order stuff.  I think it’d be interesting to be building new evolutions that cross several spheres (including educational variables inside an evolution based around sports).  I think it’d be interesting to start crunching the data in the database and pushing out new hypotheses for people to talk about.

For instance, if people were entering in their individual clothing item data, could they gather more easily to find out where to get another one, or to trade?  Would this be a better way to associate than by google searching?

One could quickly figure out what data men and women tend to focus on when they first get into Galapag.us.  Etc.

So right now I’m constrained by a lack of data since I’m the only one who’s really using the thing right now.  But that means I’m focusing on the core of the platform.

It’s slow-going and I could use the help…but I do enjoy doing this full-time for the first time.

Thoughts?  Suggestions?  Can you help?  It’s a pretty simple jQuery, PHP, MySQL project codebase…