Corante: technology, business, media, law, and culture news from the blogosphere
OUR PUBLICATIONS:
Corante is a trusted, unbiased source on technology, business, law, science, and culture that’s authored by leading commentators and thinkers in their respective fields. Corante also produces premium conferences and publications that help decision-makers better understand their industries and the world around them.
Corante Blogs
Corante Blogs examine, through the eyes of leading observers, analysts, thinkers, and doers, critical themes and memes in technology, business, law, science, and culture.
Vin Crosbie, on the challenges, financial and otherwise, that newspaper publishers are facing: "The real problem, Mr. Newspaperman, isn't that your content isn't online or isn't online with multimedia. It's your content. Specifically, it's what you report, which stories you publish, and how you publish them to people, who, by the way, have very different individual interests. The problem is the content you're giving them, stupid; not the platform its on."
by Vin Crosbie in Rebuilding Media
There's a problem in the drug industry that people have recognized for some years, but we're not that much closer to dealing with it than we were then. We keep coming up with these technologies and techniques which seem as if they might be able to help us with some of our nastiest problems - I'm talking about genomics in all its guises, and metabolic profiling, and naturally the various high-throughput screening platforms, and others. But whether these are helping or not (and opinions sure do vary), one thing that they all have in common is that they generate enormous heaps of data.
by Derek Lowe in In the Pipeline
Now that the Web labor market is saturated and Web design a static profession, it's not surprising that 'user experience' designers and researchers who've spent their careers online are looking for new worlds to conquer. Some are returning to the “old media” as directors and producers. More are now doing offline consulting (service experience design, social policy design, exhibition design, and so on) under the 'user experience' aegis. They argue that the lessons they've learned on the Web can be applied to phenomena in the physical and social worlds. But there are enormous differences...
by Bob Jacobson in Total Experience
Clay Shirky, in deconstructing Second Life hype: "Second Life is heading towards two million users. Except it isn’t, really... I suspect Second Life is largely a 'Try Me' virus, where reports of a strange and wonderful new thing draw the masses to log in and try it, but whose ability to retain anything but a fraction of those users is limited. The pattern of a Try Me virus is a rapid spread of first time users, most of whom drop out quickly, with most of the dropouts becoming immune to later use."
by Clay Shirky in Many-to-Many
Over the last few years we've seen old barriers to creativity coming down, one after the other. New technologies and services makes it trivial to publish text, whether by blog or by print-on-demand. Digital photography has democratised a previously expensive hobby. And we're seeing the barriers to movie-making crumble, with affordable high-quality cameras and video hosting provided by YouTube or Google Video and their ilk... Music making has long been easy for anyone to engage in, but technology has made high-quality recording possible without specialised equipment, and the internet has revolutionised distribution, drastically disintermediating the music industry... What's left? Software maybe? Or maybe not."
by Suw Charman in Strange Attractor
Derek Lowe on the news that the Nobel Prize for medicine has gone to Craig Mello and Andrew Fire for their breakthrough work: "RNA interference is probably going to have a long climb before it starts curing many diseases, because many of those problems are even tougher than usual in its case. That doesn't take away from the discovery, though, any more than the complications of off-target effects take away from it when you talk about RNAi's research uses in cell culture. The fact that RNA interference is trickier than it first looked, in vivo or in vitro, is only to be expected. What breakthrough isn't?"
by Derek Lowe in In the Pipeline
Andrew Phelps: "Recently my WoW guild has been having a bit of a debate on the merits of Player-vs.-Player (PvP) within Azeroth. My personal opinion on this is that PvP has its merits, and can be incredible fun, but the system within WoW is horridly, horribly broken. It takes into account the concept of the battle, but battle without consequence, without emotive context, and most importantly, without honor..."
From later in the piece: "When I talk about this with people (thus far anyway) I typically get one of two responses, either 'yeah, right on!' or 'hey, it’s war, and war isn’t honorable – grow the hell up'. There is a lot to be said for that argument – but the problem is that war in the real historical world has very different constraints that are utterly absent from fantasized worlds..."
by Andrew Phelps in Got Game
Derek Lowe: "So, you're developing a drug candidate. You've settled on what looks like a good compound - it has the activity you want in your mouse model of the disease, it's not too hard to make, and it's not toxic. Everything looks fine. Except. . .one slight problem. Although the compound has good blood levels in the mouse and in the dog, in rats it's terrible. For some reason, it just doesn't get up there. Probably some foul metabolic pathway peculiar to rats (whose innards are adapted, after all, for dealing with every kind of garbage that comes along). So, is this a problem?.."
by Derek Lowe in In the Pipeline
Bob Jacobson, on shopping at his local Albertsons supermarket where he had "one of the worst customer experiences" of his life: "Say what you will about the Safeway chain or the Birkenstock billionaires who charge through the roof for Whole Foods' organic fare, they know how to create shopping environments that create a more pleasurable experience, at its best (as at Whole Foods) quite enjoyable. Even the warehouses like Costco and its smaller counterpart, Smart & Final, do just fine: they have no pretentions, but neither do they dump virtual garbage on the consumer merely to create another trivial revenue stream, all for the sake of promotions in the marketing department..."
by Strange Attractor in Total Experience
Kevin Anderson: "First off, I want to say that I really admire the ambition of the Guardian Unlimited’s Comment is Free. It is one of the boldest statements made by any media company that participation needs to be central to a radical revamp of traditional content strategies... It is, therfore, not hugely surprising to find that Comment is Free is having a few teething troubles..."
by Kevin Anderson in strange
Corante Developments
Here you will find the latest news from Corante including updates on upcoming events, new initiatives, product and publication launches, and more.
It was with shock that I returned home from a night out last night to hear the news of Russell's passing. How terribly, terribly sad. Most of all for him, as he'd seemed buoyant, healthier, and content when I'd last seen him several months ago when he was in town - he was happy that work was busy and rewarding and was having fun with it but most of all was thrilled about how things were going with his girlfriend, Ellen.
I've known Russ for what seems like ages now (in a good way) though in fact it's only been about six or seven years since the early days of "commercial" blogging when he started working on various projects at and around Corante. He was a diligent, committed, and prolific journalist who had impressively and more ably than others been able to make the transition from the old-school way of doing things to the new. He had his quirks, as we all do, but I greatly valued that he was good-natured, collegial, reliable, quick to adopt, trustworthy, eager to learn, and earnest in his interest in helping others better understand what he wrote about.
He was also, it should be said, a kind and thoughtful soul and it was the rare conversation in which he didn't ask, with sincerity, about what he knew of my life, e.g. our new babe, and we didn't talk as seemingly old friends about our lives and respective paths. I can't say I knew him very well, of course, but in our half-dozen get-togethers over the years and dozens of conversations I got a good sense of the man: he cared about learning and sharing and his bearing was earnest and ego-less and we'll miss him for that and more.
We wanted to let you know about a discount to New Comm Forum, the annual event event put on by our friends at the Society for New Communications Research. The conference, which runs from April 22-25, will feature many of the field's leading observers and is an important event for those looking, in the words of SNCR, to "better understand new communications tools, technologies and emerging modes of communication, and their effect on traditional media, professional communications, business, culture and society."
Check out the event's website and, if you're interested in attending, be sure to use the code supplied below for a special discount.
EARLY BIRD PRICING - NOW UNTIL FEB. 15th
NewComm Forum Conference - $995.
Pre-conference or post-conference session - $195.
SNCR Jam only - $75.
REGULAR PRICING - AFTER FEB. 15th
NewComm Forum Conference - $1095.
Pre-conference or post-conference session - $249.
SNCR Jam only - $75.
CORANTE READER DISCOUNTS
NewComm Forum Conference - save an additional $100
Use discount code: NCF08100
Pre-conference or post-conference session - save an additional $45.
Use discount code: NCF0845
We've been remiss in letting you know about two new independent blogs we've helped launch in the past month or so.
The first - the ConversationHub - is a companion blog to Supernova 2007, the latest edition of Kevin Werbach's excellent conference on all things connected. As the conference site says: "Supernova examines the effects of an increasingly connected world on business, life, and public policy. As disparate physical and social networks link with one another, a new societal network is rapidly evolving... The New Network is greater than the sum of its parts. It challenges us to re-create everything from the software and hardware we use...to the business models we employ...to the information and entertainment we encounter...to the ways we work and play."
Visit the ConversationHub and you'll find several dozen leading thinkers and doers, led by a few notable ringleaders, weighing in on the themes and trends of the day in technology and business. We encourage you to tune in - feel free to comment and even suggest topics and ideas for posts.
The second blog - Mobile Messaging 2.0 - convenes about a dozen top observers of the mobile messaging space for an intense discussion of the industry and where it's headed. Among its contributors are leading commentators, journalists and players in the field - tune in and you'll find them touching on topics such as mobile device design, messaging platforms, market pressures, user-generated content, interface design, and much, much more.
Also, if you visit the site, which is sponsored by Airwide Solutions, this week, you'll find live coverage and commentary from Global Messaging 2007, to which several of our contributors have traveled to hear about the latest developments from a broad spectrum of the industry's players and providers.
Be sure to catch the Office 2.0 Conference and hear from and engage with leading thinkers and doers in this exciting new market. Find out more here and be sure to use the code "GLDRK" for a special discount for Corante readers.
In the Pipeline: Don't miss Derek Lowe's excellent commentary on drug discovery and the pharma industry in general at In the Pipeline
55,000 Science Teachers: "Stunned and Disappointed" by the President
Posted by Carl Zimmer
A statement from the National Science Teachers' Association on Bush's remarks about Intelligent Design:
NSTA Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President Bush
2005-08-03 - NSTA
The National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the world's largest organization of science educators, is stunned and disappointed that President Bush is endorsing the teaching of intelligent design - effectively opening the door for nonscientific ideas to be taught in the nation's K-12 science classrooms.
"We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science. Intelligent design has no place in the science classroom," said Gerry Wheeler, NSTA Executive Director.
Monday, Knight Ridder news service reported that the President favors the teaching of intelligent design so "so people can understand what the debate is about."
"It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom," said NSTA President Mike Padilla. "Nonscientific viewpoints have little value in increasing students' knowledge of the natural world."
NSTA strongly supports the premise that evolution is a major unifying concept in science and should be included in the K-12 education frameworks and curricula. This position is consistent with that of the National Academies, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and many other scientific and educational organizations.
1. Jeff Chamberlain on August 3, 2005 05:37 PM writes...
"Disappointed," maybe. But "stunned?" The NSTA is saying that this caught them so by surprise that they were "stunned?" 56,000 science teachers really had no idea that GWB was a creationist (excuse me, ID supporter)? C'mon.
I agree with Jeff Chamberlain. Is there ANYONE left who could be "stunned" by what GWB says or does? Not to mention what his administration says and does. Those days of being stunned are l-o-n-g over folks.
I agree. If they're really stunned, it makes me wonder if teachers that clueless should be in such an influential position with the nation's future.
Maybe our schools will benefit from some fresh new ID'ers. :)
Of course we all know that nobody was surprised by this. I'm sure Planned Parenthood, People for the American Way, and the National Association for Women were just as stunned that Bush would nominate a conservative pro-life candidate for the Supreme Court. Its all obvious rhetoric that sits on the shelf waiting for an appropriate opportunity for release.
A thing like this is aimed at parents who don't know better. They need to be told, in huge capital letters, that their child's teacher -- someone they know -- is really shocked by this. And "stunned" is the new word for "shocked". I know it connotes surprise rather than moral outrage, but I'm afraid that moral outrage has been so devalued in thelast fifty years that we have to use surprise as a substitute.
5. Joseph Poliakon on August 4, 2005 05:57 AM writes...
Intelligent Design may be pseudoscience, but NSTA Executive Director, Gerry Wheeler, is wrong to say it “has no place in the science classroom.”
The education professionals in NSTA have fallen into the all too fatal trap that is an occupational hazard of teachers. Because teachers teach material to and evaluate and grade students whose ages and experience are one quarter-to-one half that of theirs, they start believing, acting-reacting as though they are the reference source of all knowledge and understanding. If they don't know it, it ain't knowledge...if they don't understand it, it ain't understandable.
I learned Darwin’s Theory of Evolution along side the Intelligent Design laid out in Genesis 1-31. Some how my pPod absorbed both without any synaptic damage (some may dispute this last statement). I say, “Bring ‘em both on!”
As any scientist or student of science knows, bad lab data will fall of its own weight. Teach the theories of evolution and intelligent design side-by-side, and let the “lab data” determine the winner.
I agree with President Bush on this one. Teach intelligent design so "so people can understand what the debate is about."
People should indeed know what the debate is about. However, that does not mean ID should be taught in science classes as a scientific alternative to evolutionary theory. There is a debate going on, but anyone who takes this as a scientific debate is flatout wrong, allthough ID proponents love to present their objections to evolution (and materialistic science as a whole) as science. The debate is religious and political, and should be handled as that: a debate about the power of religion and belief to act upon the education of children, which the ID-proponents disguise as a scientific discours. If ID is to be handled in classrooms, then it should be as a moral and religious viewpoint, in an anthropological or sociological way. It has no place whatsoever in biology or science as a whole.
It is worth pointing out that 55,000 teachers weren't stunned, the PR person and admin staff for NSTA was. As a member of the NSTA I wasn't at all surprised by Bush's announcement. I also have no intention of ever including ID in my curriculum as it meets absolutely none of the criteria constituting science. I barely have enough time to cover evolution the way I want to; I'm not going to waste valuable class time on a vapid subject like ID.
Exactly so. I am getting tired of Mr. Bush and friends trying to cram his know-nothing views into all aspects of our life. We made a big mistake electing him. Although, come to think of it, we actually elected Mr. Gore.
What's most insidious is the attempt to frame this as a "debate". A small cult of religious whack-jobs are attempting to undermine the well-understood and non-theistic explanations for certain fundamental processes. Calling this attempt a "debate" gives it credibility it simply can't get on its own merits.
Actually this "debate" SHOULD be taught in schools - but NOT as science. Rather, it should be taught in a Politics class, or in Rhetoric, as an example of how special interest groups make gains using slippery arguments and misdirection.
10. Ken Severson on August 5, 2005 02:02 PM writes...
It basically comes down to this. ID is religion. Religion should be taught in the home and the church. Evolution is a scientific theory and should be taught in the schools. If you think ID is a scientific theory then you need to go back to school and learn what the word really means. Our President is lacking any real intelligence and showed that with his comments on ID.
Washington, DC. The American Astronomical Society is releasing the
text of a letter concerning "intelligent design" and education that
was sent earlier today to President George W. Bush by the President
of the Society, Dr. Robert P. Kirshner.
August 5, 2005
The President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
As President of the American Astronomical Society, I was very disappointed
by the comments attributed to you in an article in the August 2nd, 2005
Washington Post regarding intelligent design. While we agree that part
of education is to expose people to different schools of thought,
intelligent design has neither scientific evidence to support it nor an
educational basis for teaching it as science. Your science adviser, John
H Marburger III correctly commented that intelligent design is not a
scientific concept.
Scientific theories are coherent, are based on careful experiments and
observations of nature that are repeatedly tested and verified. They
arent just opinions or guesses. Gravity, relativity, plate tectonics and
evolution are all theories that explain the physical universe in which we
live. What makes scientific theories so powerful is that they account for
the facts we know and make new predictions that we can test. The most
exciting thing for a scientist is to find new evidence that shows old
ideas are wrong. Thats how science progresses. It is the opposite of a
dogma that cant be shown wrong. Intelligent design is not so bold as to
make predictions or subject itself to a test. Theres no way to find out
if it is right or wrong. It isnt part of science.
We agree with you that scientific critiques of any theory should be a
normal part of the science curriculum, but intelligent design has no
place in science classes because it is not a scientific critique.
It is a philosophical statement that some things about the physical world
are beyond scientific understanding. Most scientists are quite optimistic
that our understanding will grow, and things that seem mysterious today
will still be wonderful when they are within our understanding tomorrow.
Scientists see gaps in our present knowledge as opportunities for
research, not as a cause to give up searching for an answer by invoking
the intervention of a God-like intelligent designer.
The schools of our nation have a tough joband there is no part of their
task that is more important than science education. It doesnt help to mix
in religious ideas like intelligent design with the job of understanding
what the world is and how it works. Its hard enough to keep straight how
Newtons Laws work in the Solar System or to understand the mechanisms of
human heredity without adding in this confusing and non-scientific agenda.
It would be a lot more helpful if you would advocate good science teaching
and the importance of scientific understanding for a strong and thriving
America. Intelligent design isnt even part of science it is a
religious idea that doesnt have a place in the science curriculum.
Sincerely,
Robert P. Kirshner
President, American Astronomical Society
Harvard College Professor and Clowes Professor of Science at Harvard
University
12. mike ferrell on August 9, 2005 09:23 PM writes...
OK, let us teach the controversy. Let's all go out to our various university libraries and dig up all the empirical evidence published for ID theory and dig up all the empirical evidence we can find for evolution. Then we can compare the evidence and see for which the preponderance lies. WHAT? THERE IS NO PUBLISHED EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR ID? Guess that answers that one.
Why is creationism not science? Are all of their critiques of evolution based purely on religion? If I point to radio halos in granite as evidence of a young Earth, why shouldn't that be discussed in a science class? If we discover that all levels of the Earths strata contain the same amount of C-14 why shouldn't we learn about that in a science class? Would only a small cult of religious whack-jobs ask such questions? Are these types of discussions off limits to a president?
Corante: technology, business, media, law, and culture news from the blogosphere
OUR PUBLICATIONS:
Corante is a trusted, unbiased source on technology, business, law, science, and culture that’s authored by leading commentators and thinkers in their respective fields. Corante also produces premium conferences and publications that help decision-makers better understand their industries and the world around them.
Corante Blogs
Corante Blogs examine, through the eyes of leading observers, analysts, thinkers, and doers, critical themes and memes in technology, business, law, science, and culture.
Vin Crosbie, on the challenges, financial and otherwise, that newspaper publishers are facing: "The real problem, Mr. Newspaperman, isn't that your content isn't online or isn't online with multimedia. It's your content. Specifically, it's what you report, which stories you publish, and how you publish them to people, who, by the way, have very different individual interests. The problem is the content you're giving them, stupid; not the platform its on."
by Vin Crosbie in Rebuilding Media
There's a problem in the drug industry that people have recognized for some years, but we're not that much closer to dealing with it than we were then. We keep coming up with these technologies and techniques which seem as if they might be able to help us with some of our nastiest problems - I'm talking about genomics in all its guises, and metabolic profiling, and naturally the various high-throughput screening platforms, and others. But whether these are helping or not (and opinions sure do vary), one thing that they all have in common is that they generate enormous heaps of data.
by Derek Lowe in In the Pipeline
Now that the Web labor market is saturated and Web design a static profession, it's not surprising that 'user experience' designers and researchers who've spent their careers online are looking for new worlds to conquer. Some are returning to the “old media” as directors and producers. More are now doing offline consulting (service experience design, social policy design, exhibition design, and so on) under the 'user experience' aegis. They argue that the lessons they've learned on the Web can be applied to phenomena in the physical and social worlds. But there are enormous differences...
by Bob Jacobson in Total Experience
Clay Shirky, in deconstructing Second Life hype: "Second Life is heading towards two million users. Except it isn’t, really... I suspect Second Life is largely a 'Try Me' virus, where reports of a strange and wonderful new thing draw the masses to log in and try it, but whose ability to retain anything but a fraction of those users is limited. The pattern of a Try Me virus is a rapid spread of first time users, most of whom drop out quickly, with most of the dropouts becoming immune to later use."
by Clay Shirky in Many-to-Many
Over the last few years we've seen old barriers to creativity coming down, one after the other. New technologies and services makes it trivial to publish text, whether by blog or by print-on-demand. Digital photography has democratised a previously expensive hobby. And we're seeing the barriers to movie-making crumble, with affordable high-quality cameras and video hosting provided by YouTube or Google Video and their ilk... Music making has long been easy for anyone to engage in, but technology has made high-quality recording possible without specialised equipment, and the internet has revolutionised distribution, drastically disintermediating the music industry... What's left? Software maybe? Or maybe not."
by Suw Charman in Strange Attractor
Derek Lowe on the news that the Nobel Prize for medicine has gone to Craig Mello and Andrew Fire for their breakthrough work: "RNA interference is probably going to have a long climb before it starts curing many diseases, because many of those problems are even tougher than usual in its case. That doesn't take away from the discovery, though, any more than the complications of off-target effects take away from it when you talk about RNAi's research uses in cell culture. The fact that RNA interference is trickier than it first looked, in vivo or in vitro, is only to be expected. What breakthrough isn't?"
by Derek Lowe in In the Pipeline
Andrew Phelps: "Recently my WoW guild has been having a bit of a debate on the merits of Player-vs.-Player (PvP) within Azeroth. My personal opinion on this is that PvP has its merits, and can be incredible fun, but the system within WoW is horridly, horribly broken. It takes into account the concept of the battle, but battle without consequence, without emotive context, and most importantly, without honor..."
From later in the piece: "When I talk about this with people (thus far anyway) I typically get one of two responses, either 'yeah, right on!' or 'hey, it’s war, and war isn’t honorable – grow the hell up'. There is a lot to be said for that argument – but the problem is that war in the real historical world has very different constraints that are utterly absent from fantasized worlds..."
by Andrew Phelps in Got Game
Derek Lowe: "So, you're developing a drug candidate. You've settled on what looks like a good compound - it has the activity you want in your mouse model of the disease, it's not too hard to make, and it's not toxic. Everything looks fine. Except. . .one slight problem. Although the compound has good blood levels in the mouse and in the dog, in rats it's terrible. For some reason, it just doesn't get up there. Probably some foul metabolic pathway peculiar to rats (whose innards are adapted, after all, for dealing with every kind of garbage that comes along). So, is this a problem?.."
by Derek Lowe in In the Pipeline
Bob Jacobson, on shopping at his local Albertsons supermarket where he had "one of the worst customer experiences" of his life: "Say what you will about the Safeway chain or the Birkenstock billionaires who charge through the roof for Whole Foods' organic fare, they know how to create shopping environments that create a more pleasurable experience, at its best (as at Whole Foods) quite enjoyable. Even the warehouses like Costco and its smaller counterpart, Smart & Final, do just fine: they have no pretentions, but neither do they dump virtual garbage on the consumer merely to create another trivial revenue stream, all for the sake of promotions in the marketing department..."
by Strange Attractor in Total Experience
Kevin Anderson: "First off, I want to say that I really admire the ambition of the Guardian Unlimited’s Comment is Free. It is one of the boldest statements made by any media company that participation needs to be central to a radical revamp of traditional content strategies... It is, therfore, not hugely surprising to find that Comment is Free is having a few teething troubles..."
by Kevin Anderson in strange
Corante Developments
Here you will find the latest news from Corante including updates on upcoming events, new initiatives, product and publication launches, and more.
It was with shock that I returned home from a night out last night to hear the news of Russell's passing. How terribly, terribly sad. Most of all for him, as he'd seemed buoyant, healthier, and content when I'd last seen him several months ago when he was in town - he was happy that work was busy and rewarding and was having fun with it but most of all was thrilled about how things were going with his girlfriend, Ellen.
I've known Russ for what seems like ages now (in a good way) though in fact it's only been about six or seven years since the early days of "commercial" blogging when he started working on various projects at and around Corante. He was a diligent, committed, and prolific journalist who had impressively and more ably than others been able to make the transition from the old-school way of doing things to the new. He had his quirks, as we all do, but I greatly valued that he was good-natured, collegial, reliable, quick to adopt, trustworthy, eager to learn, and earnest in his interest in helping others better understand what he wrote about.
He was also, it should be said, a kind and thoughtful soul and it was the rare conversation in which he didn't ask, with sincerity, about what he knew of my life, e.g. our new babe, and we didn't talk as seemingly old friends about our lives and respective paths. I can't say I knew him very well, of course, but in our half-dozen get-togethers over the years and dozens of conversations I got a good sense of the man: he cared about learning and sharing and his bearing was earnest and ego-less and we'll miss him for that and more.
We wanted to let you know about a discount to New Comm Forum, the annual event event put on by our friends at the Society for New Communications Research. The conference, which runs from April 22-25, will feature many of the field's leading observers and is an important event for those looking, in the words of SNCR, to "better understand new communications tools, technologies and emerging modes of communication, and their effect on traditional media, professional communications, business, culture and society."
Check out the event's website and, if you're interested in attending, be sure to use the code supplied below for a special discount.
EARLY BIRD PRICING - NOW UNTIL FEB. 15th
NewComm Forum Conference - $995.
Pre-conference or post-conference session - $195.
SNCR Jam only - $75.
REGULAR PRICING - AFTER FEB. 15th
NewComm Forum Conference - $1095.
Pre-conference or post-conference session - $249.
SNCR Jam only - $75.
CORANTE READER DISCOUNTS
NewComm Forum Conference - save an additional $100
Use discount code: NCF08100
Pre-conference or post-conference session - save an additional $45.
Use discount code: NCF0845
We've been remiss in letting you know about two new independent blogs we've helped launch in the past month or so.
The first - the ConversationHub - is a companion blog to Supernova 2007, the latest edition of Kevin Werbach's excellent conference on all things connected. As the conference site says: "Supernova examines the effects of an increasingly connected world on business, life, and public policy. As disparate physical and social networks link with one another, a new societal network is rapidly evolving... The New Network is greater than the sum of its parts. It challenges us to re-create everything from the software and hardware we use...to the business models we employ...to the information and entertainment we encounter...to the ways we work and play."
Visit the ConversationHub and you'll find several dozen leading thinkers and doers, led by a few notable ringleaders, weighing in on the themes and trends of the day in technology and business. We encourage you to tune in - feel free to comment and even suggest topics and ideas for posts.
The second blog - Mobile Messaging 2.0 - convenes about a dozen top observers of the mobile messaging space for an intense discussion of the industry and where it's headed. Among its contributors are leading commentators, journalists and players in the field - tune in and you'll find them touching on topics such as mobile device design, messaging platforms, market pressures, user-generated content, interface design, and much, much more.
Also, if you visit the site, which is sponsored by Airwide Solutions, this week, you'll find live coverage and commentary from Global Messaging 2007, to which several of our contributors have traveled to hear about the latest developments from a broad spectrum of the industry's players and providers.
Be sure to catch the Office 2.0 Conference and hear from and engage with leading thinkers and doers in this exciting new market. Find out more here and be sure to use the code "GLDRK" for a special discount for Corante readers.
1. Jeff Chamberlain on August 3, 2005 05:37 PM writes...
"Disappointed," maybe. But "stunned?" The NSTA is saying that this caught them so by surprise that they were "stunned?" 56,000 science teachers really had no idea that GWB was a creationist (excuse me, ID supporter)? C'mon.
Permalink to Comment2. Buck Turgidson on August 3, 2005 06:32 PM writes...
I agree with Jeff Chamberlain. Is there ANYONE left who could be "stunned" by what GWB says or does? Not to mention what his administration says and does. Those days of being stunned are l-o-n-g over folks.
Permalink to Comment3. Doug on August 3, 2005 06:43 PM writes...
I agree. If they're really stunned, it makes me wonder if teachers that clueless should be in such an influential position with the nation's future.
Maybe our schools will benefit from some fresh new ID'ers. :)
Of course we all know that nobody was surprised by this. I'm sure Planned Parenthood, People for the American Way, and the National Association for Women were just as stunned that Bush would nominate a conservative pro-life candidate for the Supreme Court. Its all obvious rhetoric that sits on the shelf waiting for an appropriate opportunity for release.
Permalink to Comment4. Andrew Brown on August 3, 2005 07:51 PM writes...
A thing like this is aimed at parents who don't know better. They need to be told, in huge capital letters, that their child's teacher -- someone they know -- is really shocked by this. And "stunned" is the new word for "shocked". I know it connotes surprise rather than moral outrage, but I'm afraid that moral outrage has been so devalued in thelast fifty years that we have to use surprise as a substitute.
Permalink to Comment5. Joseph Poliakon on August 4, 2005 05:57 AM writes...
Intelligent Design may be pseudoscience, but NSTA Executive Director, Gerry Wheeler, is wrong to say it “has no place in the science classroom.”
The education professionals in NSTA have fallen into the all too fatal trap that is an occupational hazard of teachers. Because teachers teach material to and evaluate and grade students whose ages and experience are one quarter-to-one half that of theirs, they start believing, acting-reacting as though they are the reference source of all knowledge and understanding. If they don't know it, it ain't knowledge...if they don't understand it, it ain't understandable.
I learned Darwin’s Theory of Evolution along side the Intelligent Design laid out in Genesis 1-31. Some how my pPod absorbed both without any synaptic damage (some may dispute this last statement). I say, “Bring ‘em both on!”
As any scientist or student of science knows, bad lab data will fall of its own weight. Teach the theories of evolution and intelligent design side-by-side, and let the “lab data” determine the winner.
I agree with President Bush on this one. Teach intelligent design so "so people can understand what the debate is about."
Permalink to Comment6. kim on August 4, 2005 07:58 AM writes...
People should indeed know what the debate is about. However, that does not mean ID should be taught in science classes as a scientific alternative to evolutionary theory. There is a debate going on, but anyone who takes this as a scientific debate is flatout wrong, allthough ID proponents love to present their objections to evolution (and materialistic science as a whole) as science. The debate is religious and political, and should be handled as that: a debate about the power of religion and belief to act upon the education of children, which the ID-proponents disguise as a scientific discours. If ID is to be handled in classrooms, then it should be as a moral and religious viewpoint, in an anthropological or sociological way. It has no place whatsoever in biology or science as a whole.
Permalink to Comment7. Cameron Peters on August 4, 2005 01:56 PM writes...
It is worth pointing out that 55,000 teachers weren't stunned, the PR person and admin staff for NSTA was. As a member of the NSTA I wasn't at all surprised by Bush's announcement. I also have no intention of ever including ID in my curriculum as it meets absolutely none of the criteria constituting science. I barely have enough time to cover evolution the way I want to; I'm not going to waste valuable class time on a vapid subject like ID.
Permalink to Comment8. Eugene on August 4, 2005 03:13 PM writes...
Exactly so. I am getting tired of Mr. Bush and friends trying to cram his know-nothing views into all aspects of our life. We made a big mistake electing him. Although, come to think of it, we actually elected Mr. Gore.
Permalink to Comment9. Stefan on August 4, 2005 03:40 PM writes...
What's most insidious is the attempt to frame this as a "debate". A small cult of religious whack-jobs are attempting to undermine the well-understood and non-theistic explanations for certain fundamental processes. Calling this attempt a "debate" gives it credibility it simply can't get on its own merits.
Actually this "debate" SHOULD be taught in schools - but NOT as science. Rather, it should be taught in a Politics class, or in Rhetoric, as an example of how special interest groups make gains using slippery arguments and misdirection.
Permalink to Comment10. Ken Severson on August 5, 2005 02:02 PM writes...
It basically comes down to this. ID is religion. Religion should be taught in the home and the church. Evolution is a scientific theory and should be taught in the schools. If you think ID is a scientific theory then you need to go back to school and learn what the word really means. Our President is lacking any real intelligence and showed that with his comments on ID.
Permalink to Comment11. cats on August 5, 2005 07:55 PM writes...
Washington, DC. The American Astronomical Society is releasing the
text of a letter concerning "intelligent design" and education that
was sent earlier today to President George W. Bush by the President
of the Society, Dr. Robert P. Kirshner.
August 5, 2005
The President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
As President of the American Astronomical Society, I was very disappointed
by the comments attributed to you in an article in the August 2nd, 2005
Washington Post regarding intelligent design. While we agree that part
of education is to expose people to different schools of thought,
intelligent design has neither scientific evidence to support it nor an
educational basis for teaching it as science. Your science adviser, John
H Marburger III correctly commented that intelligent design is not a
scientific concept.
Scientific theories are coherent, are based on careful experiments and
observations of nature that are repeatedly tested and verified. They
arent just opinions or guesses. Gravity, relativity, plate tectonics and
evolution are all theories that explain the physical universe in which we
live. What makes scientific theories so powerful is that they account for
the facts we know and make new predictions that we can test. The most
exciting thing for a scientist is to find new evidence that shows old
ideas are wrong. Thats how science progresses. It is the opposite of a
dogma that cant be shown wrong. Intelligent design is not so bold as to
make predictions or subject itself to a test. Theres no way to find out
if it is right or wrong. It isnt part of science.
We agree with you that scientific critiques of any theory should be a
normal part of the science curriculum, but intelligent design has no
place in science classes because it is not a scientific critique.
It is a philosophical statement that some things about the physical world
are beyond scientific understanding. Most scientists are quite optimistic
that our understanding will grow, and things that seem mysterious today
will still be wonderful when they are within our understanding tomorrow.
Scientists see gaps in our present knowledge as opportunities for
research, not as a cause to give up searching for an answer by invoking
the intervention of a God-like intelligent designer.
The schools of our nation have a tough joband there is no part of their
task that is more important than science education. It doesnt help to mix
in religious ideas like intelligent design with the job of understanding
what the world is and how it works. Its hard enough to keep straight how
Newtons Laws work in the Solar System or to understand the mechanisms of
human heredity without adding in this confusing and non-scientific agenda.
It would be a lot more helpful if you would advocate good science teaching
and the importance of scientific understanding for a strong and thriving
America. Intelligent design isnt even part of science it is a
religious idea that doesnt have a place in the science curriculum.
Sincerely,
Permalink to CommentRobert P. Kirshner
President, American Astronomical Society
Harvard College Professor and Clowes Professor of Science at Harvard
University
12. mike ferrell on August 9, 2005 09:23 PM writes...
OK, let us teach the controversy. Let's all go out to our various university libraries and dig up all the empirical evidence published for ID theory and dig up all the empirical evidence we can find for evolution. Then we can compare the evidence and see for which the preponderance lies. WHAT? THERE IS NO PUBLISHED EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR ID? Guess that answers that one.
Permalink to Comment13. Toasty Moe on August 15, 2005 04:21 AM writes...
Why is creationism not science? Are all of their critiques of evolution based purely on religion? If I point to radio halos in granite as evidence of a young Earth, why shouldn't that be discussed in a science class? If we discover that all levels of the Earths strata contain the same amount of C-14 why shouldn't we learn about that in a science class? Would only a small cult of religious whack-jobs ask such questions? Are these types of discussions off limits to a president?
Permalink to Comment