Archive for July 24, 2007
July 24, 2007 at 10:56 PM · Filed under art, biology, complex systems, critical theory, genomics, interdisciplinary, metaphors
Gabriel A. Harp
Leonardo. August 2007, Vol. 40, No. 4, Pages 376-381
Evidence from language, history and form suggest an analogy between the cinema and the genome. The author describes some of the relationships between cinema and the genome and points to opportunities for discovering unmarked categories within the genome and new methods of representation. This is accomplished by evaluating existing metaphors presented for the understanding of genetics and revealing how current scientific understanding and social concerns suggest a cinematic alternative. The formal principles of function, difference and development mediate discussion and serve as heuristics for investigating creative opportunities.
July 24, 2007 at 10:43 PM · Filed under art, narration, visual culture
From the Leonardo website:
Forty years ago in Paris, a group of artists, scientists and engineers got together and decried the lack of professional venues where emerging work bridging the two cultures could be presented, debated and promoted. Frank Malina, himself a research engineer and a professional artist, convinced publisher Robert Maxwell of Pergamon Press to take on the challenge of publishing a peer-reviewed scholarly art-science-technology journal, the first time such a project had been attempted.
To date they have published the work of more than 5,500 artists, researchers and scholars. In keeping with our networked times, the Leonardo community is collaborating with groups around the world on a variety of events.
Watch an interview with Executive Editor Roger Malina as he explains a little more about the history and activities of the Leonardo community.
July 24, 2007 at 8:37 PM · Filed under Design, interaction, technology
Yeah, it looks good. I’m usually not one to comment on these things, but as you’ll see below it took on a personal touch. I have to admit that I am very attracted to the iPhone, and as technology goes it’s simple and portable. This weekend an Apple store opened in Ann Arbor. I just happened to pass by during the opening while looking for a new pair of glasses at the mall (I ended up sticking to contacts).
I really like the idea of being able to access the web from anywhere or even just from WiFi hotspots. That the big deal for me. I like the idea of not having to pay a cell provider for access to the web even more. The iPhone is smaller and slimmer than I had envisioned from the pictures. I was surprised at just how easy and intuitive the interface was to use. Apple’s big breakthrough, the “finger zoom” I guess you could call it, works pretty well.
I did not like the high incidence of “false positives”, that is, times when I would go to zoom or move a zoomed-in page and accidentally click on an ad or some other link (lucky for Google). This seems to suggest some rethinking of web design for these smaller devices. It’s not that anything is smaller per se, but when your pointer goes from 2 pixels to 20 (your finger), you have to make icons instead of arrows and numbers for navigation. You might also have to have parts of the page that are link-free, going against everything the New York Times stands for with its “every-word-is-hot-linked” approach. Typing is also difficult, but I suspect that, like texting, it may be possible to overcome the limitations of extra-small keys on the touchscreen.
Still, I didn’t even begin to grasp the possibility until talking with my grandmother this weekend. We’ve been trying to find a solution for her to be able to access the web and send mail. Getting her a full-fledged computer is overkill, and she’s definitely a minimalist with not intention of having a big clunking box on her antique desktop. We got to talking about her new phone and how she never uses it, in part because the many functions make it difficult to navigate and simply enter her friend’s phone number. I asked her who her provider was, and then it dawned on me: The iPhone might solve her interaction problems. Leave it to Apple to make interaction interactive (..now about that whole sustainable environment thing…Steve).
I tend to typically assume that new technology and interfaces are more difficult to use and not easier. This is usually because some marketing department has gotten too invented in the design, trying to sell features and products that nobody needs or wants. The iPhone is actually pretty simple, and the icons make doing simple things like entering a phone number easy because you can see the navigational menu structure. Calling is the same as selecting a full name. I like the idea of Grandma being able to operate her computer form a small and portable device. She’s been wanting to surf the web, and she still needs an operable phone. Perhaps the iPhone is it, but she’ll have to be the judge.
I’m still waiting for the semantically important switch from iTechnology to uTechnology, but that’s me. I wonder how these things can help us collect data in the field and otherwise do science 2.0? Then again, Naoki hacked his pda a long time ago to enter info about his flowers and their levels of inbreeding.
July 24, 2007 at 5:16 PM · Filed under Uncategorized
I came across this post (The way we present genomic and proteomic data on the web sucks, Nascent) while out searching on another task. Interesting that the life science folks are maybe just now starting to get it. I’ve been saying for years that the big issue with communicating genetics, genomics, and evolution in general has to do with HOW we present the information and data. It’s never enough to simply say that researchers need to just do the science. It’s not just scientists that are the shareholders in this project; everyone has a stake and it’s up to all of those involved to take a crack at making the science and the information more accessible, more story-like, and more engaging in general.
Here’s an example of sucks. Too bad I don’t know what to search for.
This was why we started OrganelleView. It’s not the solution, but it’s a start.
