I woke up yesterday, to a flood of warnings on facebook, telling me about this deeply disturbed individual, and that several dogs had already died. Even in my grumpy pre-coffee morning haze, something smelled a little off.

A few hours later the media backtracked, and the mystery was solved. It turned out it was the commendable tradition of Oslo Hash House Harriers, beer-drinkers with a running problem. A very british ex-pat invention, the Hash House Harriers have a hare that leaves a trail, the hounds follow, and beer is consumed at the end. This, incidentaly, is maybe the only kind of fitness group I could see myself join and enjoy. The trail is environmentally friendly sawdust or flour. Figures.

But here is the mystery… how, HOW does this happen? How does the connection of “my dog sniffed some sawdust” go to “my dog sniffed some sawdust and then got diarrhea”, and then to “dogs sniffed sawdust and diiiiied!” then further to “INSANE MAN poisons dogs!” HOW does this happen? Who add that crucial sentence, “man (because that was what it said) poisons dogs, dogs have died”?!

Apparently a pet-shop had a sign up, saying this. But where did it start?! There must be a single human that added drama to the “dog sniffs stuff”, and others who escalates.

The papers contacted the local humane-societies, the veterinary institute, the food safety authority and the police. The society for prevention of cruelty to animals says they have had several reports of sick dogs. The canines are apparently listless, have diarrhea and do not eat well. A far cry from being dead, and certainly not an uncommon malady, partics with the gunky weather here now.

A dog sniffs and licks a million things outside, and some of them enjoy rolling around in dog poo. But how, oh, mystery, hooow did this canard happen?

Facebook is practically untrackable. The information there is nearly impossible to source, and one feather turns into five hens, as the saying goes. People are sentimental, they see a status warning of this terribly disturbed man, and dare not not share it. It is about social conscience. The thing is, if you do not share it, it does not mean that you want dogs killed, but it plays on our love for animals, our conscience, a social responsibility to warn others of possible misfortune. And so it generates, escalates and goes haywire. And viral.

And then the newspapers pick it up, and parrots random facebookers who cannot even spell instead of doing a little research.

Use your heads, people. If you wanted to poison dogs. Would sawdust be the first thing that springs to mind? If dogs have died, do you not think the teary face of the owner of some mutt would be all over the media within 30 seconds of said mutts demise? Dead cats? Birds? Rats? And not the least. Facebook updates with a million exclamation marks after it does not inspire confidence.

I would really like to know how this works: the gears of this process is not easily figured out; the “social media” is a messy tangle with  lots of dead ends. A curious similarity to the aim of the hares of the Hash House Harriers.

Will someone please do some solid research on this?

Note. I said solid.

..and the top pic is of highly-alive Grainne (look up the irish pronounciation), my Aussie dog-friend.

The quality drink their champagne and mockingly toasts the great unwashed people below. Do you not know what a large group of ticked off people can do? You do not even have to read history. You do not even have to leave the timespan of this week. The snowball does not care about what is fair, correct or who is or was responsible. I believe you call it critical mass.

I heard an “expert” say that the protest would never achieve anything, because it is too vague, there is no clear message, they are not united under a common banner. The expert went on to say that the protesters could not achieve anything, because it is like the messy anti-war protest in the sixties.

Come again?! ..and what happened in the sixties, children? Yes, the anti-war protests and the hippies were not exactly homogenous. But things changed.

BBC radio 4 friday night comedy; one of my favourite podcasts. Last fridays NewsQuiz edition was brilliant. Sandi Toksvig, Jeremy Hardy, Andy Hamilton and Fred MacAulay are my best friends on fridays. Pointing out that usually when there is a protest, experts say “this is a few, extremists people”. Except that this time that is not the case. Jeremy Hardy quotes various media having nothing else to say that these are “well educated reasonable people”. How to you deal with that? Funny man.

One of my favourite pictures from Wall St. is one of librarians. Yes, you know things are messed up when librarians starts marching  (I will add the image here later, if the photographer gives me permission). There are guerilla libraries. How can you not love that?

The world is off its trolley, undoubtedly. Winter is coming though, and New York gets cold. Who will continue, and who does not have a choice anymore?

Many of them say they are proud to be Americans. They should not be. They should rant, rave and create change. And then be proud.

These are well behaved people. Maybe they shouldn’t be.

edit:

I will let someone more eloquent than me sketch out some very valid points. Smile or die, from Barbara Ehrenreich, courtesy of th RSA.

 “Imagine an electronic page for each species of organism on Earth..

Encyclopedia of life is an amazing, insane undertaking. E. O. Wilson did a delightful, rambling TED-talk, and things actually happened. A lot of people apparently got together, large sums of money was involved, an awful lot of meetings, I presume, and a website was born. With a whole bunch of impressive collaborators, they started building a page for every living thing. Every living named thing, I should say. We do not really know how may species there is on earth.

Personally, I thought the site was awful. Then – Hurrah! – they rebuilt and redesigned recently. It got much better, I certainly approve. It is made by scientists and the public; we can all contribute, and the information is moderated by scientists. I love the idea, I love the insane ambition of it, I love living things, and I think it is both scientifically and individually important. This is a good start for having a positive dander through a website. Through lifeforms, actually. I excitedly open the brand new EOL. Not unreasonably, I am met with a large search box.

And there I sat. What to search for? Pathetically, I typed in “cat”. I messed around with felidae. You and me can contribute to EOL, so I amused myself looking for pics of peoples pets. I imagine a lot of people would think it wonderous to have their tabby put in encyclopedic context for all the world to see. Then I did “elephant shrew”. Because they are the funniest little things. I fiddle about with the taxonomy for a bit, but my latin is not good enough, my understanding of taxonomy a little shaky, their tree a little unclear (Taxonomy, by the way, is a scary, scary thing, but that is a different chapter). So, as is so often the case, finding something specific, the known-item-search is wonderfully easy. It is the discovering that is a problem.

UI & UX. Unknown terms to many. It stands for usability and user interface; we all know when these things do not work. It is a bit like only noticing the surface you are driving on when it is full of potholes.

I have to say, EOL is not full of potholes. They are doing a lot of things right. But here is what I would have liked to play with, what I would like to discover. If I was the president of the universe, EOL would have these things for me to explore… find living things that have the colour green. All things with fur that lives in Marocco. What creatures are parasites, what have symbiotic relations? (The disturbing Cymothoa exigua, the tongue-eating louse springs to mind) Who eats who? What species overlap where? What is the food chain for a deepwater anglerfish, a bobcat, a tapir? What do humans make and eat of various species? Why are there no green mammals? What species have their closest relation on another contient? Show me all creatures with wings. How many species of dragonflies? What species are directly dependent on each other, and which species are mutually beneficial? I can go on and on and on. I am a little Napoleonic here maybe, EOL is a massive undertaking as it is.

And maybe it is a good thing they do not have this. If EOL ever get these things, I would never leave the site, and get nothing done.

Of course, making this would be either the nightmare of a lifetime, or the most fun you could possibly have. A million potholes, and a million things that can go wrong, I see piles of technical problems, itches and conundrums. But I mean; imagine… dream…

If you wish to study a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon

The researcher that wrote the book on media we used in my digital media bachelor, tweeted an article from Discovery News via ABC a while back. Apparently, a bunch of other researchers in USA have researched Facebook, using it as a tool for personality analysis – or more popular term; personality test. They state some depressingly obvious things, but elegantly jump to what I will describe as utter loony-off-their-trolleys conclusions. And no-one bats an eyelid.

They use the methods and categories of sociology (I will not say “traditionally used in..”, as this lends it an air of antiquity which it does not deserve or merit), and from the information people give about themselves, they test if that is consistent with other personality tests. Apparently. Apart from the fact that I suspect a lot of personality tests are utter rubbish, this seems a little scientifically thin to me. “Sociology Mickey-Mouse-science looks through tech”. Nevermind. Let me quote a conclution from ABC’s article:

“The researchers also found that people with long last names tended to be more neurotic, perhaps because “a lifetime of having one’s long last name misspelled may lead to a person expressing more anxiety and quickness to anger,” according to the study, which is being presented this week at the Computer Human Interaction conference in Vancouver.”

Read that again. We take these people seriously? We pay them? We let them play in their labs for this? They spend electricity, occupy space as they come up with this? I find a lot of sociology methodology highly questionable, but this is bonkers. Hot air conjured up from hot air. Oh, wait, .. duh. I actually checked the publish date on this article, to be absolutely sure it was not an aprils fool.

But the rant does not end there. The guy who tweeted, whose books was on my curriculum, is the guy the media calls when they need a “social media expert” (how the meta-levels on this works is mind-boggling). I tweeted back to him, asking if he seriously thought that people with long surnames are more neurotic than others? His disturbing answer was “science has spoken!”

As I said, it is a granfalloon.

Maybe I got it all wrong. Maybe this is an endlessly intelligent study, a wonderfully insightful paper and wondrous presentations. If so, the journalist at Discovery News should find something else to do. Communication: it is so hard that not even journalists and communication media PhD’ers can do it.

HistoryPin is a nifty little site, that gives you the opportunity to load historical pictures in streetview. I think it needs more work and refining, but it is a splendid thing, informative and fun.

This map shows the worlds most interesting remote places from touristiness. It exemplifies basically a heat map, that shows density. This particular map is curiously interesting because it shows interesting remote places, while as the natural instinct would be to go for the – say – most popular places (they do that too). In that sense, it is a “negative” map, and therefore a tad more interesting. The idea is to show you where you are less likely to meet other tourists. As a way of showing density, heat maps are brilliant. Intuitive, easy to understand, and highly flexible.

I also learned about fusion tables, and how Google includes the Similie timeline. This feels a little ironic, as we looked into Similie in 2010 as a potential solution for this project for the Smithsonian. We then decided against it, mainly because it was unnecessarily large, and the documentation a little shaky for our project. Now, it seems, it works directly with fusion tables… so it goes.

I also learned about other things, such as shapefiles (shp), Google Earth Builder, intensity maps with own defined borders and space-time. I have to look into all of it. Exciting times, and indeed thanks to Mano Marks.

You have the Apple fans and the – until recently slightly guilty – Microsoft followers. The MS crowd seems to have gained some confidence back recently, and they yell as loud as the macApple clan.
The two biggest companies have become, as most other complex situations and multinationals, personal. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs (No, it does not matter that Bill Gates no longer works for/at MS). They are these companies. It is a sort of anthropomorphism. But here is what kills me every time: Sooner rather than later the argument gets to ethics. Bill Gates is an altruist. Therefore Microsoft is best. Apple apparently uses child labour in appalling conditions. This makes Apple evil. Therefore, Microsoft is best. Microsoft was for a long time the king of proprietary formats. Evil. Therefore, Apple is best. Ad nauseam.

Chew on that one. Evil.

Arguments are usually pointless and based on emotions, that again are based on coincidences, what you are used to, grew up with. As in religion, the newly converted are always the worst. Apple and Microsoft are big, big, big companies. They want to make money. Pretty much like every other company. But somehow, we think their ethical conduct more essential and important than others massive systems. We somehow seems to expect better or otherwise from them. It is fundamentally absurd.

Though I too would want to see a more ethical world, and wishes for multinationals to be responsible, intelligent, I do not comprehend why all these emotions are spent on these two, and how that transfers to the software and hardware. When will you protest the awful practices of the producer of your food-processor, hair-dryer, the proprietary software in your car? The paint you use for your house? Diamonds? (“nothing says I love you like a superficial…”) Why not a public outcry against the s/w control-thievery of a squillion other things in your house, your pockets, your office?

Where is your outrage?
Wasted on bickering over the tools that was supposed help us change the world.

And, yes. We are all sheep. Geeks included.

Websites. it is everything and nothing. Not everyone needs a website. But by god, how much shite is out there – it is baffling; it begs belief.

There are reams, piles and buckets of resources on usability, rules-of-thumb. Endless, boring description of best-practice. And yet, I cannot find the address of the shop. The map on how to get there. The products. It drowns in FLASH, animations. I can hear the customer saying “make something that lives“. Vomit.

So I can’t find the phone number, a simple list of products. Xkcd describes it perfectly in the chart above.

..and of course, there is The Oatmeal’s how a webdesign goes straight to hell

Why this rant now? This is nothing new. In fact, small businesses in USA tends to be the worst. I do not know how it works, if they all have a cousin that “are really good at webdesign” (QUICK! RUN! HIDE!) or whatever. I was simply trying to find a bakery in D.C.

It annoys me that so much time, energy, money and talent goes to waste on making shite. These are simple sites. I want to find a bakery. I wonder what sort of stuff they have. When they are open.

I found a couple of bakeries. But because it is all FLASH, I cannot send links to specific content. I have to send the index url, and then write down all the clicks necessary to find the danish pastry. Do you think I will bother?

To all your FLASHdevelopers out there: fucking stop now! If you cannot do most of it in HTML you are idiots. Stay away from making websites.

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

I was summoned to the interview, both by phone and an e-mail through finn.no’s system.

With a spring in my step, I bounced to the given address, and found the company in question. A cup of coffee, some chit-chat, and off we went. ”We are a small company”, the guy says. “so the work is diverse, you’d have to do lots of different things”. All good with me; I prefer variety. “Outsourcing”, he says. “marked analysis”, he says. I followed as well as I could, but attempting to steer a little towards methods, tools and processes; closer to my heart and attention. Trying to figure out what and how exactly my place and job as a 3D assistant would pan out.

“Do you know our four major competitors?” says he. “no” I say. “Well, you should.”
At this point I am a little frustrated. I cannot entirely see that a 3D-assistants first priority should be knowing that. Surely, I’d learn that within the first day. I’d rather hear and talk about software, processes, workflow, cooperation. About quality. He goes on. And on. And on. About marked strategies, quizzing me on what and how I would grab marked shares from competitors, how would I do it? What other markeds could I see for this company? How would I expand it? How would I get the customers? Do I have the drive for this?

A small gnome in my head tries to get my attention; there is something wrong here. A little nagging feeling that something is not right. But an interview is a stressful situation, I answer to the best of my abilities, on Q’s about outsourcing, time zones, marked shares.

I try to talk about files. About the technology behind. I try to say that a lot of these questions I cannot answer properly, without knowing the processes and methods in the company. On and on. Nag, nag, goes the little gnome.

I am getting increasingly frustrated. All of a sudden, the interview is over. I politely bid them goodbye, they say the standard “we will call you next week”.

I am rather frustrated, but have no-one to blame but myself; I realise I have not done a good job. A long discussion in my head on the way home. What happened, how could I do so badly, when it seemed I should easily manage to get myself across as sensible and useful? Nag, nag.

Back at home, the little gnome gets me to double check the mail I got. It is tagged, from the job-marked site, both in subject field and footer: “regarding application for “3d-assistant” code 24732471″. Seems I fucked up :-(

The little gnome goes “paste that code in the url, paste that code in the url, paste that code in the url”.

Right.

Weeeell! Will you look at that…!
That was an entirely different kettle of fish. The ad had been changed, and this time around the title was not 3D-assistant, but “project management and global outsourcing”.
Not really interchangeable.

We had all been sensible and relevant. Same time, same place. Just not the same interview.

So it goes.

Update

I mailed them about the mistake. In fact, all was dead silence. I admit I got pissed off; they could have said “ups, sorry”. I left it for a long time, then mailed them, and said I thought they owed me an apology, as it is stressful enough to be applying for jobs, if not also have to keep track of various companies every idiot move.

He replied. He justified himself, and said “the ad was not (in the original version) there for long. The position has been filled.”

Why is it so fucking hard to say sorry? Because the company wanted to save tiny money, not paying for another ad, he makes it look like I am the idiot.

Fuck you very much.
“Ups, sorry, our mistake” would have been fine with me. The curious thing is that they summoned me to an interview for project management and global outsourcing, on the basis of an application as a 3d assistant.

Professional, they are not.

This one is for my friend AFH.

self, at 21, on Fraser Island, Queensland, Oz

I travelled in South East Asia, Australia and New Zealand back in the dark ages before the internet. I remember my brother told me before I left, that in the future, I could use any computer anywhere in the world to talk to him. Back then I thought, but why would I want to?

Things have happened since then, and I am very happy with the technology, to the degree that it takes up large amount of my time, contains my work, and hope for a job in the inner, deeper levels of information and data handling and meaning.

Mount Bromo, Java, Indonesia

Today, we travel as flashpackers. Last time in Australia, in 2005, I remember it annoyed me that I had piles of cables, electronics, discs and data in my backpack. I am getting used to it. A couple of years back, I went to Damascus, and my professor wanted me to go to the souq, find a carpet-seller, and show him the (uploaded) photo he took of him a few years before. I stared at the prof in disbelief: did he think I would bring my widescreen macbook along on my holiday!?

Anyway. I remembered back to my jaunt through South East Asia, Australia and New Zealand back way yonder. Not able to read the papers or understand the news on telly, I only got glimpses of what went on in the world when I came to a large city and could buy a Newsweek. If I bothered. Or found a crumpled copy in some dusty mountain village in Sumatra. Grand and gruesome happenings in the world passed me by.

I dawdled, wandered, splashed, spluttered, lollygagged and pottered around, unaware of riots in Europe, unaware of riots down the road. I had several poste restante, and got news from Indonesia via my family. Four weeks later.

So now, we pack the internet. And in so doing, we pack our history, connections, friends and habits. And habits is the clue here. I was, back then, cut off. And in being cut off, I was forced to take part in what went on around me. At times it was tiring, at times the cultures and the demands on me was more than I liked, as a female Scandinavian travelling alone. I imagine that if I had internet back then, my 21 year-old self would be online whingeing about the locals, the annoying invasion of my personal space, the incomprehensible customs and reactions.
As it were, there was no Net, and slowly I learned to understand why things happened, learned to avoid it, live with it or enjoy it.

This is dangerous ground for me: I do not want to glorify the “good old days”. On the other hand, you could say that if I had had internet, I would have been able to connect with locals before I left; I could have googled incomprehensible cultural differences. I would have learned from that, with my fact-hungry, analytical left brain.

At one point, I became, relatively, “an old hand”. I saw people fresh of their planes, who blundered into and stamped over local customs and sensibilities. It made me cringe. Sometimes I could not explain why, other than “you don’t do that”. Right-brain stuff.

There are loss-and-gain, obviously. But the feeling of isolation; of being basically cut off (and yet part of a society) for months.. I wouldn’t mind that again. But it is not possible.

You cannot step twice into the same river.

-b

selling goodies, Bukittingi, Sumatra, Indonesia

(the images are all scans from my slides from back then)