Sean Parker on careers

FT.com / Columnists / Lunch with the FT - Lunch with the FT: Sean Parker
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8383ab06-45e3-11e0-acd8-00144feab49a.html#axzz1FkqxeoCx

“Solving specific problems is what drives me. I am not interested in having a career. I never have been,” he says. “This in no way resembles a career. I think a career is something your father brings home in a briefcase every night, looking kind of tired.”

(via Instapaper)

Forced randomness

Rock-paper-scissors_you_vs

The New York Times has a fascinating interactive feature on artifical intelligence. It lets you play rock-paper-scissors against a computer and reveals the logic the algorithm is applying to predict your next move.
Computers mimic human reasoning by building on simple rules and statistical averages. Test your strategy against the computer in this rock-paper-scissors game illustrating basic artificial intelligence. Choose from two different modes: novice, where the computer learns to play from scratch, and veteran, where the computer pits over 200,000 rounds of previous experience against you.
I found it quite amazing that the "veteran" was actually better then the "novice" when I played, despite the fact that I could reveal the computer's logic with a click everytime I wanted to. I tried to subject my moves to what I believed was complete randomness - but I guess humans are just really bad at being truly random at will. There is always some kind of subconscious logic guiding your decision - and with enough data to rely on, a computer becomes pretty good at guessing your next move.

One big integrated system

Good portrait of Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter and Square. 

"For Dorsey, it’s all one big integrated system. Transactions are like traffic. Traffic flows over the beautiful bridge. The bridge is a point on the map. The map is an expression of the scheme, the stream, the grand flow of interactions. And he’s been thinking about this stuff since he was eight."

http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2011/04/jack-dorsey-201104

The Birth of a Word

Deb Roy's amazing data science project

Over on his shiny new Tumblr, my good friend, fellow Sandboxer and fellow TEDxZurich organizer Thierry has a great wrap-up of what was certainly the most fascinating of the TED talks we've seen yesterday during the livestream: MIT scientist Deb Roy presented a project for which he recorded every sound and every movement in his house over the course of two years. With this incredible amount of data, Roy was able to virtually recreate situations like the time when his baby son was taking more than two steps at once - in Roys words, this is akin to "reliving" certain situations from your life.
I found the more subtle things Roy does with his data more intriguing - especially his demonstration on how a word is "born": Digging through his data, Roy extracted every instance of his son saying the word "gaga", which over the course of six months slowly metamorphed into "water". Hearing how a child learns a word in a 40-second time lapse recording is truly amazing.

Watching TED

Photo

The TEDxZurich team hosted a live viewing of one day of the TED2011 conference currently happening in Long Beach, California yesterday. We had a full house and a great time - thanks to everyone who joined, and especially to the fantastic team at Papiersaal who provided a lot of support and their great location for the event. Check the discussion on Twitter for some statements from attendees.

Dying movies & angry journalists

Many journalists are at their best when they're angry. Consider Mark Harris' piece in GQ on the demise of Hollywood movies - and why it all started with "Top Gun":

Then came Top Gun. The man calling the shots may have been Tony Scott, but the film’s real auteurs were producers Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer, two men who pioneered the “high-concept” blockbuster—films for which the trailer or even the tagline told the story instantly. At their most basic, their movies weren’t movies; they were pure product—stitched-together amalgams of amphetamine action beats, star casting, music videos, and a diamond-hard laminate of technological adrenaline all designed to distract you from their lack of internal coherence, narrative credibility, or recognizable human qualities. They were rails of celluloid cocaine with only one goal: the transient heightening of sensation.

But the people who are ultimately to blame for all the bad movies are not the studio bosses - it's us:

Blaming the studios for everything lets another culprit off too easily: us. We can complain until we’re hoarse that Hollywood abandoned us by ceasing to make the kinds of movies we want to see, but it’s just as true that we abandoned Hollywood. Studios make movies for people who go to the movies, and the fact is, we don’t go anymore—and by we, I mean the complaining class, of which, if you’ve read this far, you are absolutely a member. We stay home, and we do it for countless reasons: A trip to the multiplex means paying for parking, a babysitter, and overpriced unhealthy food in order to be trapped in a room with people who refuse to pay for a babysitter, as well as psychos, talkers, line repeaters, texters, cell-phone users, and bedbugs. We can see the movie later, and “later” is pretty soon—on a customized home-theater system or, forget that, just a nice big wide-screen TV, via Netflix, or Amazon streaming, or on-demand, or iPad. The urgency of seeing movies the way they’re presumably intended to be seen has given way to the primacy of privacy and the security of knowing that there’s really almost no risk of missing a movie you want to see and never having another opportunity to see it. Put simply, we’d rather stay home, and movies are made for people who’d rather go out.