It seems my clever stratagem is going to prevail and I will soon be able to demonstrate first hand as it were exactly what a man wears beneath his kilt.* I told JayG in my bid e-mail that I planned to kilt up for next years KTKC effort and the first step in my strategy proceeds apace.
I'm already looking into structuring my contribution solicitation efforts by means of the Zapoint Skills Mapping tools to organize my efforts. Lance Armstrong's Livestrong charity collection and documentation system of course; the money never touches my hands. I also hope to use the Skills Map to put together an item or two as prizes for next years event. If KTKC is "the company", and my blog is my "production unit" therein, I hope the Zapoint Skills Mapping tools will permit me to diversify and broaden my contribution solicitations prior to next September's Prostate Cancer Awareness campaign (and maybe convince Zapoint to agree to a bit of corporate sponsorship withal).
Just over 10 months to go; should be time enough to build a winning strategy I think.
* Answer: All that God gave him. Of course.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Profundity Found Here
Well, here. Click on the little audio player gadget, the interview lasts 15 minutes.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Exchange Rate Established
So, 1 Israeli is worth 1000 Palestinians.
I'd say the IDF has it's work cut out for it the next time the neighbors get all unruly. That's a lot of ammo to hump.
I'd say the IDF has it's work cut out for it the next time the neighbors get all unruly. That's a lot of ammo to hump.
Friday, October 14, 2011
War! What Is It Good For?
We keep doing this military advisor disguise for our extra-constitutional military combat deployments.
At least it's a shorter supply line than Vietnam (for the history challenged, our involvement there began the same way). Which doesn't really make up for the lack of harbors, so everything has to be flown in this time.
At least it's a shorter supply line than Vietnam (for the history challenged, our involvement there began the same way). Which doesn't really make up for the lack of harbors, so everything has to be flown in this time.
Thoughts On Situational Awareness And Guns
In and amongst all of the other distinctions we gun owners like to discuss is that of situational awareness, most commonly as that concept applies to our potential for having to use a gun in self defense. I want to propose the adoption of a three-stage classification of SA to better distinguish between the options available.
[Now that I've done all this, someone point out how long ago someone else did it much better. :)]
In reading a recent blog post by Rory Miller, he was making the point that there are visual cues related to detecting a physical attack specific to short range encounters:
This is close range, from a maximum of 3 yards/10 feet to handshake distance. Any attack initiated within these distances simply cannot be reliably defeated by resorting to a holstered gun, whatever it's condition or method of carry. For the determinedly argumentative amongst my gunnie bretheren and sisteren, I will happily stipulate that an exception is indeed possible to almost any given general postulate such as the one offered herein. I simply am not agreeable to staking my life or anyone else's on the likelihood of such appearing just when needed most, thankyouveddymuch.
At the other end of the scale is long range - for the design of pistol/revolver one is likely to attempt to carry (commonly concealed) on their person. This is when "strategic thinking" comes to the fore; how attractive a target are you relative to others, is this an actively disputed part of town by rival gangs, any recent "social actions" (read: riots or demonstrations) in the area? Things of that general nature, factors not directly related to you necessarily, but relevant to the decision-making process. Go/no go, alone or in a group only? You can't completely predict specific occurrences, but you can develop techniques for measuring the relative likelihood of extreme events occurring in a general locale during given times or other metrics.
The local Walmart parking lot at 9:30 am on a Sunday morning? Almost certainly too early in the day for most of the criminally inclined segment of the populace as well as the - how shall I put this? - the more socially restrained segment of the Walmart clientele? The exact same terrain at Midnight Friday night watching the drunk college chicks stop in to make a quick purchase? Much more entertaining (ask me how I know :)), but also more likely to attract others willing to seize the opportunistic moment as well. Same business locale, same basic social function taking place, entirely different levels of threat involved. Long range SA, assessing and identifying the conditions that contribute to a threat of violence being more or less likely at a given place/time of day, and that can be accounted for and efforts taken to negate.
For the purposes of this proposal, I'm going to stipulate that these are threats of attack that can be identified from a minimum physical distance of 15 yards/50 feet away, regardless of the time of day or locale. That's a distance of 5 to 6 cars parked side-by-side or three or more aisles away in a store setting. Plenty of distance to physically escape or create a defensive or hide position (with greatest emphasis on the first of these - RUN).
Scenario.
A carload of rowdy individuals get out of their car(s) in the same parking lot aisle you are walking down towards your car. You immediately walk between parked cars to the next aisle over, keeping track of them while not making direct eye contact. If they follow into your new aisle, change to the next, now openly watching them. Consider beginning a trot/side-step/backpedal towards the store entrance instead of your car. If they continue an aggressive advance, dump the groceries and sprint for the store entrance (or car if that should actually be closer at this point). Draw your firearm only if you have no other alternative and aim center mass at the nearest target until they retreat or they overwhelm you (an event not to be ignored - but your gun might be more effective as a hammer at that point). Never threaten, never try to intimidate; if someone intends to attack you it won't stop them and might attract the attention of the one who hadn't quite decided yet.
End of story. Maybe.
A common enough situation that might degenerate into violence and taken to it's ultimate point of potential conflict. I hope the many steps available to avoid or escape are self-evident.
So, that leaves the mid-range of situational awareness, something that makes itself apparent between 3 and 15 yards away. These are the toughest to defend; the least amount of time/distance within which to make an assessment and decision before the attacker's action makes the choice for you. Even someone like myself, who determinedly carries a 1911 in Condition 3 (Yo, Weird, pffffft! :)), has time to draw, cycle the slide to load a round in the chamber, aim and deliberately fire OR make an effort at escape, but not to think about it much. Mid-range threats aren't those that transition from further out (like that illustrated above), but only appear after you are too close to easily decide on a response and take the action. If the threat is directed at another you might have some additional time to make a judgement in, but you can't count on it. This is gun range, but that isn't a cut and dried option to choose.
I've got no advice to offer on this particular circumstance except to note that, absent some legislative mechanism specifically exempting you from it's application, it is a tenant of American law that no one can pre-emptively defend themselves (or some other person or property). There has to be an after-the-fact demonstrable direct threat of physical violence or death being imminently offered to justify a ruling of "not guilty" (or a Grand Jury "No Bill") if you kill someone. Most especially if you offer the spontaneous confession of homicide that is the plea of "self defense", which are the last words you ever want to come out of your mouth should you become involved in a shooting.
If you say self defense at any point during the investigation, you just freely confessed and the po-po are released from any further consideration of Miranda (or pretty much any other rights you had up to then) as regards the admissibility of any questions asked of you, any answers you might make or evidence gathered from you thereafter. Let me be clear on this, if you make a claim of self defense you just confessed to homicide, and assert that the evidence the cops gather will support your additional claim of an absence of any criminal guilt on your part.
I will offer this advice, surrender to the law peaceably, present your identification willingly, and then decline (politely) to answer any further questions without the advice of your legal counsel. Oh, and memorise your lawyer's phone number; Officer Friendly won't be at the crime scene, or during the booking process, and your cell phone will be taken into evidence and unavailable to you once the cops arrive on-scene.
If you doubt any of this last bit, rent your own lawyer and find out for yourself.
[Now that I've done all this, someone point out how long ago someone else did it much better. :)]
In reading a recent blog post by Rory Miller, he was making the point that there are visual cues related to detecting a physical attack specific to short range encounters:
There are ranges and positions where someone can stand and hit you without any telegraph. The threat has to be in range (drop-step exception) and have their limbs in certain positions. This is a code red thing, or what Marc calls "1". The bad guy can hit you in one motion.
For the most part that's not true. Even in range, most positions require you to shift your center of gravity (CoG) before delivering power (again, there is an exception for the drop step. I love the drop step). Marc calls this a "two". It will take two motions, a precursor and the attack itself, to do you any harm.
"Three" means the threat has to change his foot position (and the drop step, in certain positions turns all three to a one... very cool) as well as shift CoG.
I spent a lot of time in close proximity to very bad people. More than a few commented on how relaxed I was. It's powerful. Relaxation can be disconcerting, it makes the criminal think that you know something he doesn't. This was why I could do that. Not only could I tell if the bad guy could reach me, I knew, in advance, exactly what he would have to do or where he would have to shift his center in order to attack. I knew when I was safe and I knew exactly what to watch for should the threat try to move.
This is close range, from a maximum of 3 yards/10 feet to handshake distance. Any attack initiated within these distances simply cannot be reliably defeated by resorting to a holstered gun, whatever it's condition or method of carry. For the determinedly argumentative amongst my gunnie bretheren and sisteren, I will happily stipulate that an exception is indeed possible to almost any given general postulate such as the one offered herein. I simply am not agreeable to staking my life or anyone else's on the likelihood of such appearing just when needed most, thankyouveddymuch.
At the other end of the scale is long range - for the design of pistol/revolver one is likely to attempt to carry (commonly concealed) on their person. This is when "strategic thinking" comes to the fore; how attractive a target are you relative to others, is this an actively disputed part of town by rival gangs, any recent "social actions" (read: riots or demonstrations) in the area? Things of that general nature, factors not directly related to you necessarily, but relevant to the decision-making process. Go/no go, alone or in a group only? You can't completely predict specific occurrences, but you can develop techniques for measuring the relative likelihood of extreme events occurring in a general locale during given times or other metrics.
The local Walmart parking lot at 9:30 am on a Sunday morning? Almost certainly too early in the day for most of the criminally inclined segment of the populace as well as the - how shall I put this? - the more socially restrained segment of the Walmart clientele? The exact same terrain at Midnight Friday night watching the drunk college chicks stop in to make a quick purchase? Much more entertaining (ask me how I know :)), but also more likely to attract others willing to seize the opportunistic moment as well. Same business locale, same basic social function taking place, entirely different levels of threat involved. Long range SA, assessing and identifying the conditions that contribute to a threat of violence being more or less likely at a given place/time of day, and that can be accounted for and efforts taken to negate.
For the purposes of this proposal, I'm going to stipulate that these are threats of attack that can be identified from a minimum physical distance of 15 yards/50 feet away, regardless of the time of day or locale. That's a distance of 5 to 6 cars parked side-by-side or three or more aisles away in a store setting. Plenty of distance to physically escape or create a defensive or hide position (with greatest emphasis on the first of these - RUN).
Scenario.
A carload of rowdy individuals get out of their car(s) in the same parking lot aisle you are walking down towards your car. You immediately walk between parked cars to the next aisle over, keeping track of them while not making direct eye contact. If they follow into your new aisle, change to the next, now openly watching them. Consider beginning a trot/side-step/backpedal towards the store entrance instead of your car. If they continue an aggressive advance, dump the groceries and sprint for the store entrance (or car if that should actually be closer at this point). Draw your firearm only if you have no other alternative and aim center mass at the nearest target until they retreat or they overwhelm you (an event not to be ignored - but your gun might be more effective as a hammer at that point). Never threaten, never try to intimidate; if someone intends to attack you it won't stop them and might attract the attention of the one who hadn't quite decided yet.
End of story. Maybe.
A common enough situation that might degenerate into violence and taken to it's ultimate point of potential conflict. I hope the many steps available to avoid or escape are self-evident.
So, that leaves the mid-range of situational awareness, something that makes itself apparent between 3 and 15 yards away. These are the toughest to defend; the least amount of time/distance within which to make an assessment and decision before the attacker's action makes the choice for you. Even someone like myself, who determinedly carries a 1911 in Condition 3 (Yo, Weird, pffffft! :)), has time to draw, cycle the slide to load a round in the chamber, aim and deliberately fire OR make an effort at escape, but not to think about it much. Mid-range threats aren't those that transition from further out (like that illustrated above), but only appear after you are too close to easily decide on a response and take the action. If the threat is directed at another you might have some additional time to make a judgement in, but you can't count on it. This is gun range, but that isn't a cut and dried option to choose.
I've got no advice to offer on this particular circumstance except to note that, absent some legislative mechanism specifically exempting you from it's application, it is a tenant of American law that no one can pre-emptively defend themselves (or some other person or property). There has to be an after-the-fact demonstrable direct threat of physical violence or death being imminently offered to justify a ruling of "not guilty" (or a Grand Jury "No Bill") if you kill someone. Most especially if you offer the spontaneous confession of homicide that is the plea of "self defense", which are the last words you ever want to come out of your mouth should you become involved in a shooting.
If you say self defense at any point during the investigation, you just freely confessed and the po-po are released from any further consideration of Miranda (or pretty much any other rights you had up to then) as regards the admissibility of any questions asked of you, any answers you might make or evidence gathered from you thereafter. Let me be clear on this, if you make a claim of self defense you just confessed to homicide, and assert that the evidence the cops gather will support your additional claim of an absence of any criminal guilt on your part.
I will offer this advice, surrender to the law peaceably, present your identification willingly, and then decline (politely) to answer any further questions without the advice of your legal counsel. Oh, and memorise your lawyer's phone number; Officer Friendly won't be at the crime scene, or during the booking process, and your cell phone will be taken into evidence and unavailable to you once the cops arrive on-scene.
If you doubt any of this last bit, rent your own lawyer and find out for yourself.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
It Isn't Just For Gun Control
..., now socialist production planning is for farming too. RTWT for yet another example of the tactic say the same thing in a slightly different application approach to government (mis)management.
Comes in for a good kicking in the comments too, which Watts Up With That is usually good for in these circumstances.
Comes in for a good kicking in the comments too, which Watts Up With That is usually good for in these circumstances.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
He's A New Jersey Rebublican
Headline NBC New York: Chris Christie To Endorse Mitt Romney Today.
Which is to say that he is only notionally to the right of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Anyone who thought that R = Conservative needs to adjust the ol' pharmacope settings towards something closer aligned with reality.
h/t Drudge Report
Which is to say that he is only notionally to the right of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. Anyone who thought that R = Conservative needs to adjust the ol' pharmacope settings towards something closer aligned with reality.
h/t Drudge Report
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
And That Gives Me The VC Trifecta
Heard about the Kilted To Kick Cancer hem liftingfund raising effort? If you've got a prostate you ought to be digging deep ... err, lending a hand ... no, that's not right. You ought to be spending money now since a pinch of prevention is better than having your ass ripped out of you later!
Anyway, I put $10 in Stingray's collection plate on Sept. 9th. Me being me (and living in Texas and all), I figured it would be fun to goad JayG a little about the lack of accoutrement's his kilt had. He really is a sucker for a challenge, so that was another ten spot down for the cause. After that, I pretty much couldn't pass up the (help me out; honor isn't really quite the word I'm searching for here) ... opportunity to claim the bragging rights so, third time's the charm if a day late for all that.
Best $30 I ever spent, now cough then get out your wallet and get up off some money too.
Anyway, I put $10 in Stingray's collection plate on Sept. 9th. Me being me (and living in Texas and all), I figured it would be fun to goad JayG a little about the lack of accoutrement's his kilt had. He really is a sucker for a challenge, so that was another ten spot down for the cause. After that, I pretty much couldn't pass up the (help me out; honor isn't really quite the word I'm searching for here) ... opportunity to claim the bragging rights so, third time's the charm if a day late for all that.
Best $30 I ever spent, now cough then get out your wallet and get up off some money too.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
More Getting There From Here
[Now with update!]
The future is always just around the corner, and it seems the promise is always outweighed by the challenges of making the turn. The objections range from "how do we learn to do ..." to "what will we do for jobs?" and always seem to wind up with the perennial "what happens to the people who can't do it?". As if I had answers for questions about things that haven't even happened yet ...
One of the regular dismissals of proclamations about the future has to do with how a given technology will be adopted by industry and just people in general. Take for instance the future technology of 3D Printing. This is the stuff of Star Trek, right?
Nazzo fast, Guido.
A little segue here, to take another look at those questions that keep getting asked. I tend not to get all worked up about the how's and what's that always accompany change; people have been successfully adapting to changing circumstances for as long as there have been people. Now, because it's all of a sudden us having to make the change, we've somehow forgotten how? I don't buy it, and we would all be better off trying to find a way to incorporate whatever opportunity we can into out lives instead of objecting to others doing the same. No one is able to be successful at everything - and some of us seem incapable of mastering anything - but the more of us who do succeed at doing so, the more of us there are who are able to help the rest along. Which is pretty much the same messy way humans have adapted and developed throughout our history.
One of my principal hobbies is shooting (and generally spending money on) firearms. It's an American thing. I spent much of my teen years shooting 1903 Springfield-pattern rifles and 1911-pattern pistols and have taken every opportunity that came along to try my hand at whatever firearm I have been presented the chance to shoot in the years since. I'm well aware that the shooting sports and industry is steeped in the traditions and technologies long since refined to achieve the degree of finish and performance now regarded as routine and normal, so imagine my pleasant sense of surprise to read this and this and not watch the blogger have to wade through a storm of objections and dismissal by others. Those old reactionary American Gunnies slipping into the future like it was scripted by John Moses Browning himself.
Actually, I submit that the culture and mental attitude that is fundamental to modern ownership of firearms in America has much to do with why such fantastic-seeming technology, and the individual empowerment it provides, seems so readily accepted. The near-universal acknowledgement of The Four Rules (enthusiastically encouraged by the showers of scorn heaped upon those who publicly violate them) along with the widespread practice of personal licensing for private concealed carry of handguns (in 49 of the 50 US states) has, I contend, nurtured a somewhat self-reinforcing atmosphere of accentuated personal responsibility among gun owners, especially notable within the online members of the gun owning community, that exceeds anything experienced by our gun-toting ancestors. I expect the historically recent efforts to exile guns from private hands, and the apparent rejection of those efforts by our fellow citizens, has had much to do with the psychological attitudinal change that has accompanied the shift away from the "group rights" mindset toward that of individual rights common today and has also contributed to this willingness to consider the unorthodox as well. Whether or to what degree I'm right about any of that, I do think that gun owners seem better prepared to accept and adopt potentially disruptive technologies that offer the potential to expand their capability to participate in gun ownership then other sub-sets of the American populace have so far demonstrated. No doubt the historical attitude of self-sufficiency and independence associated with gun ownership strongly contributes to this willingness to accept the challenges that accompany untried opportunity as well.
What this instance also provides is a real-world example of how disruptive technology gradually transitions from threat to routine practice. Go read that wikipedia link to 3D printing in closer detail; the boys and girls at Cornell University can print food? When is that home appliance going to be for sale at Walmart?
One of the regular objections raised in discussions of this type of technology relates to education. At Phil Bowermaster's site Transparency Revolution I've recently participated in a discussion on a variant of this concern; here, here, and here, with a related post here. How we gain knowledge and experience in using it for some practical purpose isn't only a matter of having it presented to us in a controlled fashion within a regulated and structured environment (to the extent our public schools ever really were such a thing), especially now that the capability to obtain the information is literally at almost anyone's fingertips.
An example of what I mean can be read here. World of Warcraft is certainly one of the most populartime sinks online multi-player games in the world today (can you tell I'm one of the few to have successfully resisted the allure? :)). It is also the forum of choice for a presentation of the latest research findings into individual and group cognition by a research group at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. If that topic of research is of interest to you, and you can gain access to "... the Ironforge Library on the Saurfang server", your attention and contribution will likely be welcome.
The more general education point of the linked post by Labrat at her personal blog Atomic Nerds (and you too should contribute to her husband Stingray's efforts to help raise money for prostate and testicular cancer research) can be summed up best in her own words:
One more link to consider before you dismiss all this as wishful thinking. Al Fin is one of the more consistently well written and wide-ranging of topic blogs I'm aware of. S/He and/or they recently posted about an interesting educational practice the Israeli's have developed called Talpiot. From the Al Fin post:
Consider if you will an online game community structured much like the EVE example from Labrat's post, that begins at the basic levels of academic instruction and proceeds ultimately (and only really expected to attract the most fractional percentage of the total player community) to some reasonable facsimile of the Israeli Talpiot program structure (or at least it's academic/intellectual content), that is available to anyone who can gain online access at whatever schedule s/he requires and at the pace of advancement they are capable of achieving.
Think it could never work? From Labrat again, consider this Proof of Concept:
If American business entities large and small were to jointly create a mechanism (a straight-forward trust fund to finance purchase/maintenance the servers, etc once the game itself was written would accomplish this - look at the EVE model, management and repair/expansion of the game is a player responsibility), they could fund this EVE-like online educational game to their - and our - mutual advantage. If their HR departments could track at least some of their individual employee's achievements within the game, and a financial benefit for the individual employee was offered for success achieved in stipulated courses of instruction, the pending skilled/educated employee crunch that gets much moaned about might become a non-issue and the question of where the jobs will come from become self-evident. Players would probably have to roll their eyes at the inevitable product placement, but whatta ya gonna do?
Some disclaimers; I don't play electronic games, online or otherwise; there's only so many hours in a day, and so much money to be extracted from the wallet, so I'm all too aware of just how far all this strays from an personal expertise I can claim. That said, I've repeatedly learned new (to me) skills and knowledge throughout my life in order to continue some semblance of gainful employment. If I can pull this off for going on six decades now, pretty much anyone who can see the screen and hit the keys can too.
I will also readily admit that some better mechanism for gaining practical expertise to accompany all the theory needs to be developed along with the educational game I suggest here too. There's always going to be some problem needs solving. Indeed, this may not prove to be a practical mechanism at all, but I contend it does illustrate that a solution to being able to take advantage of the opportunities the disruptive future will present are available to us now. It only remains for us to make the effort to begin the gradual process of preparing ourselves to overcome the risks that are always associated with opportunity.
UPDATE 9/27/11: RobertaX takes a look at this too.
10/07/11: And Clark at Popehat gets all linked up on the details.
10/10/11: Phil at Transparency Revolution points out yet another application for educational games.
The future is always just around the corner, and it seems the promise is always outweighed by the challenges of making the turn. The objections range from "how do we learn to do ..." to "what will we do for jobs?" and always seem to wind up with the perennial "what happens to the people who can't do it?". As if I had answers for questions about things that haven't even happened yet ...
One of the regular dismissals of proclamations about the future has to do with how a given technology will be adopted by industry and just people in general. Take for instance the future technology of 3D Printing. This is the stuff of Star Trek, right?
Nazzo fast, Guido.
A little segue here, to take another look at those questions that keep getting asked. I tend not to get all worked up about the how's and what's that always accompany change; people have been successfully adapting to changing circumstances for as long as there have been people. Now, because it's all of a sudden us having to make the change, we've somehow forgotten how? I don't buy it, and we would all be better off trying to find a way to incorporate whatever opportunity we can into out lives instead of objecting to others doing the same. No one is able to be successful at everything - and some of us seem incapable of mastering anything - but the more of us who do succeed at doing so, the more of us there are who are able to help the rest along. Which is pretty much the same messy way humans have adapted and developed throughout our history.
One of my principal hobbies is shooting (and generally spending money on) firearms. It's an American thing. I spent much of my teen years shooting 1903 Springfield-pattern rifles and 1911-pattern pistols and have taken every opportunity that came along to try my hand at whatever firearm I have been presented the chance to shoot in the years since. I'm well aware that the shooting sports and industry is steeped in the traditions and technologies long since refined to achieve the degree of finish and performance now regarded as routine and normal, so imagine my pleasant sense of surprise to read this and this and not watch the blogger have to wade through a storm of objections and dismissal by others. Those old reactionary American Gunnies slipping into the future like it was scripted by John Moses Browning himself.
Actually, I submit that the culture and mental attitude that is fundamental to modern ownership of firearms in America has much to do with why such fantastic-seeming technology, and the individual empowerment it provides, seems so readily accepted. The near-universal acknowledgement of The Four Rules (enthusiastically encouraged by the showers of scorn heaped upon those who publicly violate them) along with the widespread practice of personal licensing for private concealed carry of handguns (in 49 of the 50 US states) has, I contend, nurtured a somewhat self-reinforcing atmosphere of accentuated personal responsibility among gun owners, especially notable within the online members of the gun owning community, that exceeds anything experienced by our gun-toting ancestors. I expect the historically recent efforts to exile guns from private hands, and the apparent rejection of those efforts by our fellow citizens, has had much to do with the psychological attitudinal change that has accompanied the shift away from the "group rights" mindset toward that of individual rights common today and has also contributed to this willingness to consider the unorthodox as well. Whether or to what degree I'm right about any of that, I do think that gun owners seem better prepared to accept and adopt potentially disruptive technologies that offer the potential to expand their capability to participate in gun ownership then other sub-sets of the American populace have so far demonstrated. No doubt the historical attitude of self-sufficiency and independence associated with gun ownership strongly contributes to this willingness to accept the challenges that accompany untried opportunity as well.
What this instance also provides is a real-world example of how disruptive technology gradually transitions from threat to routine practice. Go read that wikipedia link to 3D printing in closer detail; the boys and girls at Cornell University can print food? When is that home appliance going to be for sale at Walmart?
One of the regular objections raised in discussions of this type of technology relates to education. At Phil Bowermaster's site Transparency Revolution I've recently participated in a discussion on a variant of this concern; here, here, and here, with a related post here. How we gain knowledge and experience in using it for some practical purpose isn't only a matter of having it presented to us in a controlled fashion within a regulated and structured environment (to the extent our public schools ever really were such a thing), especially now that the capability to obtain the information is literally at almost anyone's fingertips.
An example of what I mean can be read here. World of Warcraft is certainly one of the most popular
The more general education point of the linked post by Labrat at her personal blog Atomic Nerds (and you too should contribute to her husband Stingray's efforts to help raise money for prostate and testicular cancer research) can be summed up best in her own words:
The thing is, though, that what game developers are essentially in the business of is making learning such a fun and organic activity that people pay in real money and real time in order to do it. It doesn’t matter how basic the game is, all that any of them offer is a chance to master an activity at progressive levels of difficulty; Tetris is a spatial puzzle that speeds up. You can see rotation of objects through space as a challenge on many, many different IQ tests. Pac-Man is another spatial puzzle- track yourself and several other moving objects through a maze, complete the maze within a time limit and without running into any other moving object. Any of the original simulation genre is complex systems manipulation and mastery, and the flight simulator became so detailed that its devotees can spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on equipment and the software to do something that has no game goal but is just as complex and difficult as flying a real plane, minus the g forces and fatal consequences. The later Sims games are a combination of resource management, virtual architecture, and learning how the AI works. Portal is another spatial puzzle, speeded up and with extra dimensions and physics problems added.
MMOs take things to the next level; something like Portal is meant to be played out over a certain number of potential gameplay hours, but an MMO developer has to make the game interesting enough, and content extendable enough, that players remain interested and engaged with the game for years. Depending on the game and the size of playerbase it’s looking to command, there are usually multiple layers of gameplay to learn and potentially master; a developer’s challenge is to make the transition between “kill ten rats, get ten silver” to “level up (gradually increase in complexity)”, to “master your class and take part in competition demanding great knowledge of the game and your role in it, teamwork, practice, and research” fun enough to be worth paying money for- and the fun is in the learning process; even very achievement-oriented players walk away if there’s no challenge to it.
EVE Online is probably the most extreme example; the point of the game is participation in a player-driven economy, which rather than being centrally controlled by the parent company is entirely player-organized and run, to the point where fantastic acts of economic sabotage that nearly any other gaming company would put their foot down on is merely part of the game experience. It’s also the only game with a player-created and elected governing political body, the Council of Stellar Management, which exists to represent the playerbase to the developer team. It is, in essence, a virtual state with virtual corporations and virtual militaries and mercenaries who do what is in nearly all respects work, with the difficulty curve to match and little effort made to make it more accessible to newer or more casual players. The work IS the point of the game. In essence, people pay real money for a non-real job with far fewer protections and benefits than a real job, except for the freedom to experiment.
One more link to consider before you dismiss all this as wishful thinking. Al Fin is one of the more consistently well written and wide-ranging of topic blogs I'm aware of. S/He and/or they recently posted about an interesting educational practice the Israeli's have developed called Talpiot. From the Al Fin post:
Talpiot is a program for bringing the best of the best of Israeli youth together into an intensive mental, physical, and military training regimen. 5,000 youth apply every year, and 50 are accepted. Out of those 50, only 40 will complete the training, and be commissioned as lieutenants in the IDF. They spend 9 years total, including education, training, and military commitment ...
... Talpiot is run by the Israeli Defense Force with the aim of creating an elite officer corps which is capable of responding to any threat by the innovative use of the most advanced technologies -- or any tool within reach. If these elite soldiers later become leaders in business, technology, finance, and other vital areas of society, it should come as no surprise to anyone who is paying attention.
Consider if you will an online game community structured much like the EVE example from Labrat's post, that begins at the basic levels of academic instruction and proceeds ultimately (and only really expected to attract the most fractional percentage of the total player community) to some reasonable facsimile of the Israeli Talpiot program structure (or at least it's academic/intellectual content), that is available to anyone who can gain online access at whatever schedule s/he requires and at the pace of advancement they are capable of achieving.
Think it could never work? From Labrat again, consider this Proof of Concept:
More accurately, this would be titled “clever biochemists induce a population of people who do spatial reasoning puzzles for fun to solve their spatial reasoning problem for entertainment and bragging rights”.
If American business entities large and small were to jointly create a mechanism (a straight-forward trust fund to finance purchase/maintenance the servers, etc once the game itself was written would accomplish this - look at the EVE model, management and repair/expansion of the game is a player responsibility), they could fund this EVE-like online educational game to their - and our - mutual advantage. If their HR departments could track at least some of their individual employee's achievements within the game, and a financial benefit for the individual employee was offered for success achieved in stipulated courses of instruction, the pending skilled/educated employee crunch that gets much moaned about might become a non-issue and the question of where the jobs will come from become self-evident. Players would probably have to roll their eyes at the inevitable product placement, but whatta ya gonna do?
Some disclaimers; I don't play electronic games, online or otherwise; there's only so many hours in a day, and so much money to be extracted from the wallet, so I'm all too aware of just how far all this strays from an personal expertise I can claim. That said, I've repeatedly learned new (to me) skills and knowledge throughout my life in order to continue some semblance of gainful employment. If I can pull this off for going on six decades now, pretty much anyone who can see the screen and hit the keys can too.
I will also readily admit that some better mechanism for gaining practical expertise to accompany all the theory needs to be developed along with the educational game I suggest here too. There's always going to be some problem needs solving. Indeed, this may not prove to be a practical mechanism at all, but I contend it does illustrate that a solution to being able to take advantage of the opportunities the disruptive future will present are available to us now. It only remains for us to make the effort to begin the gradual process of preparing ourselves to overcome the risks that are always associated with opportunity.
UPDATE 9/27/11: RobertaX takes a look at this too.
10/07/11: And Clark at Popehat gets all linked up on the details.
10/10/11: Phil at Transparency Revolution points out yet another application for educational games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
