The Theory Category Archive

Welcome to the Theory archives. The posts are listed in chronological order. Click the post title to read more.

October 29th, 2008

Uncanny Valley of the Dogs

“The uncanny valley is a hypothesis that when robots and other facsimiles of humans look and act almost like actual humans, it causes a response of revulsion among human observers. The “valley” in question is a dip in a proposed graph of the positivity of human reaction as a function of a robot’s lifelikeness. It was introduced by Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori in 1970, and has been linked to Ernst Jentsch’s concept of “the uncanny” identified in a 1906 essay, “On the Psychology of the Uncanny”. Jentsch’s conception is famously elaborated upon by Sigmund Freud in a 1919 essay, simply entitled “The Uncanny” (“Das Unheimliche“).”

Continue reading at Wikipedia.

And as it turns out, the uncanny valley is just as descriptive for dogs:

October 28th, 2008

Freud, the etymologist

“Other portions of the same dream enabled us to discover further that she had guessed that the English ‘box’ was related to the German ‘Büchse‘ ['receptacle'], and that she had then been plagued by a recollection that ‘Büchse‘ is used as a vulgar term for the female genitals.”

Sigmund Freud, The Interpretation of Dreams (1900)

October 27th, 2008

Fall in love with something that speaks italian.

If you use only the front brake, you will fly over the steering wheel and be killed. If you try to use the back one, you will use the wrong foot and change into third gear instead of stopping. So you’ll hit the obstacle you were trying to avoid, and you’ll be killed.

Then there is the steering. The steering wheel comes in the shape of what can only be described as handlebars, but if you turn them — even slightly — while riding along, you will fall off and be killed. What you have to do is lean into the corner, fix your gaze on the course you wish to follow, and then you will fall off and be killed.

As far as the minor controls are concerned, well . . . you get a horn and lights and indicators, all of which are operated by various switches and buttons on the steering wheel, but if you look down to see which one does what, a truck will hit you and you will be killed. Oh, and for some extraordinary reason, the indicators do not self-cancel, which means you will drive with one of them on permanently, which will lead following traffic to think you are turning right. It will then undertake just as you turn left, and you will be killed.

What I’m trying to say here is that, yes, bikes and cars are both forms of transport, but they have nothing in common. Imagining that you can ride a bike because you can drive a car is like imagining you can swallow-dive off a 90ft cliff because you can play table tennis.

However, many people are making the switch because they imagine that having a small motorcycle will be cheap. It isn’t. Sure, the 125cc Vespa I tried can be bought for £3,499, but then you will need a helmet (£300), a jacket (£500), some Freddie Mercury trousers (£100), shoes (£130), a pair of Kevlar gloves (£90), a coffin (£1,000), a headstone (£750), a cremation (£380) and flowers in the church (£200).

Jeremy Clarkson via Locusts and Honey

October 24th, 2008

Mind Vs Brain

“YOU cannot overestimate,” thundered psychiatrist Jeffrey Schwartz, “how threatened the scientific establishment is by the fact that it now looks like the materialist paradigm is genuinely breaking down. You’re gonna hear a lot in the next calendar year about… how Darwin’s explanation of how human intelligence arose is the only scientific way of doing it… I’m asking us as a world community to go out there and tell the scientific establishment, enough is enough! Materialism needs to start fading away and non-materialist causation needs to be understood as part of natural reality.” [...]

Schwartz and Beauregard are part of a growing “non-material neuroscience” movement. They are attempting to resurrect Cartesian dualism – the idea that brain and mind are two fundamentally different kinds of things, material and immaterial – in the hope that it will make room in science both for supernatural forces and for a soul. [...]

To properly support dualism, however, non-materialist neuroscientists must show the mind is something other than just a material brain. To do so, they look to some of their favourite experiments, such as research by Schwartz in the 1990s on people suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder. Schwartz used scanning technology to look at the neural patterns thought to be responsible for OCD. Then he had patients use “mindful attention” to actively change their thought processes, and this showed up in the brain scans: patients could alter their patterns of neural firing at will.

From such experiments, Schwartz and others argue that since the mind can change the brain, the mind must be something other than the brain, something non-material. In fact, these experiments are entirely consistent with mainstream neurology – the material brain is changing the material brain. [...]

The attack on materialism proposes to do just that, but it all turns on definitions. “At one time it looked like all physical causation was push/pull Newtonianism,” says Owen Flanagan, professor of philosophy and neurobiology at Duke University, North Carolina. “Now we have a new understanding of physics. What counts as material has changed. Some respectable philosophers think that we might have to posit sentience as a fundamental force of nature or use quantum gravity to understand consciousness. These stretch beyond the bounds of what we today call ‘material’, and we haven’t discovered everything about nature yet.”

Link to The New Scientist

October 20th, 2008

Idiots Out Wandering Around

What is the IEM?

The IEM is an on-line futures market where contract payoffs are based on real-world events such as political outcomes, companies’ earnings per share (EPS), and stock price returns. The market is operated by University of Iowa Henry B. Tippie College of Business faculty as an educational and research project.  

Who can participate in the IEM?

The IEM is operated for research and teaching purposes. All interested participants world-wide can trade in our political markets. Other markets–such as the earnings and returns markets–are open only to academic traders.

Are the participants playing with real money?

YES. Trading accounts can be opened for $5 to $500. Participants then use their funds to buy and sell contracts. Traders therefore have the opportunity to profit from their trades but must also bear the risk of losing money.

Is the IEM regulated?

The IEM is an experimental market operated for academic research and teaching purposes. The IEM is not regulated by, nor are its operators registered with, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission or any other regulatory authority.

Why would anyone operate a not-for-profit real-money market?

The IEM is operated by faculty at the University of Iowa Henry B. Tippie College of Business for educational and research purposes.

As business educators, we are concerned with preparing our students to be intelligent market participants. We and many of our colleagues at other institutions integrate the IEM into our courses. Students in these courses learn first-hand about the operation of financial markets and as a result become more well-informed traders in their future market interactions.

As business researchers, we are interested in market and trader behavior. The IEM provides a rich source of data for our research.

How does the IEM safeguard my money?

The IEM is operated under the auspices of the University of Iowa. You write your check to the University of Iowa and the funds are deposited to a University of Iowa account. When funds are withdrawn from your account, the University of Iowa accounting group (a group independent of the IEM) writes a check and mails it directly to your last known address. As a university operation, the IEM is subject to audits by university and state auditors.

Can I try out the IEM without investing money?

YES. Login to the IEM and follow the directions on the screen to log into the practice market. You will be able to do everything a trader can do, except trade in our real-money contracts.

October 16th, 2008

THE ERASURE OF MAN

One thing in any case is certain: man is neither the oldest nor the most constant problem that has been posed for human knowledge. Taking a relatively short chronological sample within a restricted geographical area–European culture since the sixteenth century–one can be certain that man is a recent invention within it. It is not around him and his secrets that knowledge prowled for so long in the darkness. In fact, among all the mutations that have affected the knowledge of things and their order, the knowledge of identities, differences, characters, equivalences, words–in short, in the midst of all the episodes of that profound history of the Same–only one, that which began a century and a half ago and is now perhaps drawing to a close, has made it possible for the figure of man to appear. And that appearance was not the liberation of an old anxiety, the transition into luminous consciousness of an age-old concern, the entry into objectivity of something that had long remained trapped within beliefs and philosophies: it was the effect of a change in the fundamental arrangements of knowledge. As the archaeology of our thought easily shows, man is an invention of recent date. And one perhaps nearing its end.

If those arrangements were to disappear as they appeared, if some event of which we can at the moment do no more than sense the possiblity–without knowing either what its form will be or what it promises–were to cause them to crumble, as the ground of Classical thought did, at the end of the eighteenth century, then one can certainly wager that man would be erased, like a face drawn in sand at the edge of the sea.

From Michel Foucault: the final two paragraphs of The Order of Things [Les mots et les choses] (1965)

THE PROBLEM WE ADDRESS

Today, 70% of all consumer time online is spent viewing content created by other consumers. As exciting as this development is, the explosive growth of social media and user-generated content has created a significant problem for marketers, publishers and advertisers all of whom rely on business tools and strategies that were created to monetize an Internet more closely resembling Henry Luce’s magazine model than the Internet that we know today. To make matters worse, the legacy advertising technologies that marketers today rely on generally fail to tap the unique opportunities afforded by social media and user generated content. The result: advertisers are disillusioned with the promise of social media but are still longing for a solution that properly addresses the significant audience (and obvious engagement) represented by the explosion of social content.

Media6° is the solution to the “social media problem”.

THE SOLUTION THAT WE PROVIDE

Our patent pending algorithms and methods connect a brand’s existing customers with user segments composed entirely of consumers who are interwoven via the social graph. These bespoke Media6° segments are both completely customized for each advertiser and enormously scalable. They reflect high degrees of homophily, the tendency of like-minded individuals to cluster with other people who strongly resemble them.

These Media6° audiences, sharing powerful demographic and psychographic traits, have been proven to respond to advertising messages at rates dramatically higher than other targeting alternatives.

Media6° is the ideal partner for brand marketers seeking large audiences displaying the highest levels of response, engagement, word of mouth and collective behavior.

CONSUMERS

Media6° believes that the best advertising solutions are those built from the ground up to protect consumer privacy. To that end, we are committed to these principles with regard to our interaction with consumers:

We do not collect or use any personal information about any consumer.

We do not attempt to discern the content or subject matter of any content page.

We help consumers to readily opt-out of Media6° cookies both at our site and through industry programs managed by the Network Advertising Initiative (NAI).

From the website of Media6°, a marketing firm specializing in online advertising.

Let’s break down what Media6° actually does. It’s fascinating, it’s brilliant, and it amounts to no less than the erasure of man.

Media6° (note the Stanley Milgram reference in their name) works with companies who want to advertise on the web. They’re in the business of collecting data, basically, which they then use to strategically place advertisements. In order to collect that data, they place 1 x 1 px squares on pages across the web, but most importantly, they place them on social networking sites like myspace, facebook, and linkedin. They don’t do so through any insidious means: they purchase advertising space from those sites, and when those sites go to retrieve an ad from the ad server, they report identifying information via the cookie that Media6° has embedded, as this is how cookies work.

They then collect information about where this individual user travels, and when they’re on a social networking site, this allows Media6° to see that person’s local social network by getting the cookie information from those users, too. Sociologists have found that people have between five and fifteen people with whom they actually associate as friends, i.e., more than acquaintances. The rest of a person’s friend list basically operates like a rolodex, but obviously, it binds a little more than that since it’s an interactive and semi-public bond (this is probably worth another essay). That means when we say network, we’re really talking about five to fifteen people. Here’s the reason for collecting the data, from a short article written by Media6° co-founder David Honig:

In fascinating research conducted in 2004, Chris Volinsky,the director of statistical research at AT&T Labs Research, undertook a study with Foster Provost, a New York University business professor, and Shawndra Hill, then an NYU graduate student and today a professor at the Wharton School. What these researchers discovered was remarkable: Any person in contact with an existing customer of a firm is three to five times more likely to respond to a message from the firm. Birds of a feather do indeed flock (and buy) together.

Even more significant, the researchers recorded these results in a direct-mail channel that involved neither an explicit nor an implied endorsement by one consumer to another – à la the troubled Facebook Beacon. In essence, the researchers found that by analyzing which customers communicated with each other, using inbound/outbound pairs on the telephone grid, they could identify “network neighbors” in the telephone social graph.

If they found one network neighbor to have responded to a particular direct mail offer, then sending the same offer to his network neighbors resulted in a three- to fivefold lift above any targeting technique not informed by this network-neighbor data. The researchers explained the results this way: “Social theory tells us that people who communicate with each other are more likely to be similar to each other, a concept called homophily …. Linked consumers probably are like-minded, and like-minded consumers tend to buy the same products.”

In other words, Media6° uses cookies on social networking sites to identify a person’s network. Those same cookies, when placed in the checkout page of a company’s website, can tell Media6° when one of their user IDs has bought a product. Then when someone in that user ID’s network visits a website populated by Media6° advertisements, the ad server pulls the advertisement for the product purchased by someone else in the network–that is to say, it pulls the advertisement that will be most effective in selling a product, as seen in the excerpt above. Also worth noting is that Media6° doesn’t advertise on social network sites because people are much more likely to tune out banner ads in that context. They collect data there and advertise elsewhere. Media6° is quite open about all this, and in addition to offering an opt-out link on their homepage, they provide a Relevant Reading section on their website, which is where I found David Honig’s article linked to above.

Now I want to note a couple things. First, I’ve been using the pronoun “they” to describe Media6°, and in some sentences this is appropriate, and in others, probably not. No person–no human–is actually looking at these cookies. Moreover, no computer program is looking at any personal data on anyone’s myspace page or even gathering anyone’s name. This is a computer running a program that takes the user ID information gathered by the embedded 1 x 1 px squares, runs it through an algorithm that makes sense of that data, and then eventually uses that to inform an ad server which ad to place on a page when a certain user ID visits. That’s it. All of the information that those of us using social network sites fill our pages with, whether sincere or tongue-in-cheek, is completely irrelevant to Media6°. While this in no way does away with the importance of demographic information for other methods of advertising, the most effective way to advertise products in 2008 does away with actual people and only sees them as nodes in a network.

Please don’t understand this as hyperbole. I mean this with complete sincerity and as much as Foucault did when he made his prediction: We are witnessing the erasure of man. I don’t say this fearfully or even as a negative evaluation. I’m not saying man is going to disappear in a vernacular sense, and to completely understand what I’m saying would require a rigorous recapitulation of The Order of Things, which while tempting is not something I’m going to do here. If I believed in an epochal view of history and thought there were epistemic breaks, I would be forced to say that at this moment we are witnessing such a transformation, and it means nothing less than the extinction of the anthropos.

[Please note: I'm not a tech guy; I'm a theory guy. If I've made any errors in explaining precisely how Media6° operates, don't hesitate to correct me. This is the web, of course, and revisions are easy.]

October 16th, 2008

On the dream of being a real, live, honest-to-gosh “writer.”

Writing model term papers is above-board and perfectly legal. Thanks to the First Amendment, it’s protected speech, right up there with neo-Nazi rallies, tobacco company press releases, and those “9/11 Was An Inside Job” bumper stickers. It’s custom-made Cliff Notes. Virtually any subject, almost any length, all levels of education [...]

DUMB CLIENTS predominate. They should not be in college. They must buy model papers simply because they do not understand what a term paper is, much less anything going on in their assignments  [...]

Term paper writing was never good money, but it was certainly fast money. For a freelancer, where any moment of slack time is unpaid time, term papers are just too tempting. Need $100 by Friday to keep the lights on? No sweat. Plenty of kids need 10 pages on Hamlet by Thursday. Finals week is a gold mine. More than once the phone rang at midnight and the broker had an assignment. Six pages by 6 a.m. — the kid needs three hours to rewrite and hand in the paper by 9 or he won’t graduate. “Cool,” I’d say. “A hundred bucks a page.” I’d get it, too, and when I didn’t get it, I slept well anyway. Even DUMB CLIENTS could figure out that they’d be better off spending $600 on the model paper instead of $2,500 to repeat a course. Back in the days when a pulse and pay stub was sufficient to qualify for a mortgage, term papers — along with gigs for dot.com-era business magazines — helped me buy my first house.

Getting the hang of it is tricky, though. Over the years, several of my friends wanted in on the term paper racket, and most of them couldn’t handle it. They generally made the same fundamental error — they tried to write term papers. In the paper mill biz, the paper isn’t important. The deadline, page count, and number of sources are. [...]

I had a girlfriend who had been an attorney and a journalist, and she wanted to try a paper. I gave her a five-page job on leash laws in dog parks, and she came home that evening with over 50 pages of print outs, all articles and citations. She sat down to write. Three hours later she was rolling on the floor and crying. She tried to write a paper, instead of filling five pages. Another friend of mine spent hours trying to put together an eight-page paper on magical realism in Latin American fiction. At midnight she declared that it was impossible to write that many pages on books she had never read. She was still weeping, chain-smoking cigarettes, and shouting at me at 2 a.m.  I took 20 minutes and finished the paper.

Link to The Smart Set via the Mental Floss Blog

October 15th, 2008

The Infinite Improbability Drive, and your stock portfolio.

From http://www.argocons.com

From http://www.argocons.com

Via the Digest for Semiological Transcoding, which seems to have gone on an extended break.

January 12, 2008
Fun Definitions from New York Magazine and H2G2

Stat-Arb: Statistical arbitrage, a.k.a. quantitative trading, a.k.a. “black-box trading.” The computerized trading of thousands of stocks based on a set of models manned by “guys with a lot of physics and hardcore statistics backgrounds who come up with ideas about models that might lead to excess return and then they test them and then basically all these models get incorporated into a bigger system that trades stocks in an automated way.”

Black Box: The computers that do the trading.

These definitions sounded vaguely familiar to me, and confirmed my long-held suspicion that, not only does life imitate art, but so too does day trading imitate science fiction –

Infinite Improbability Drive (From The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy): Finite levels of improbability could easily be generated using an electronic brain and a strong Brownian motion producer (say, a cup of hot tea); yet scientists lacked the means to create a drive that could produce the infinite improbability field required to allow a ship to travel anywhere instantaneously. It was generally concluded that such a drive was virtually impossible.

Eventually, a student (left to sweep up the lab after a particularly unsuccessful party) reasoned that if such a machine were, in fact, a virtual impossibility, then it must also logically be a finite improbability. After working out exactly how improbable, he fed that value into the finite improbability generator, gave it a really hot cup of tea, and managed to generate the infinite improbability generator out of thin air, thus violating the laws of cause and effect. After winning the Galactic Institute’s prize for extreme cleverness, he was later lynched by other scientists who had been trying to make the generator for years, and who finally worked out that what they really could not stand was a smartass.

Ever since I took an Intro to Econ class many years ago (and never took an econ class again), I’ve come to the conclusion that any science that attempts to derive solid outcomes from equations that cannot possibly have a 100% outcome is essentially science fiction. The only statistical certainty is that failure is going to happen sooner or later, and then we’ll have to start all over again.

Yes, the black boxes described are essentially finite probability drives, or something like that.

EDIT: I should add that my main focus in college was Sociology, which admittedly, is not always very accurate. I have nothing against using statistics and generating opinions and theories based off of strong correlations and such, but we have to be honest with ourselves when in comes to statistics.

October 13th, 2008

Taking another look at the evangelical voting bloc.

It helps to make some sense of arguments made by Michael Lindsay and Rebecca Sager, also on The Immanent Frame, that there are “new types” of evangelicals, often relatively progressive in their politics. And with the newly articulated concerns on, for example, poverty, AIDS, and global warming, by Rick Warren, Bill Hybels and others. So, understanding variation, and finding shades of gray in the “evangelical” monolith, may have significant political implications. [...]

Now it is true that in an electorate fairly neatly divided, one need not persuade very many people in order to win an election. Just a few cracks in the Republican base, including that part composed of conservative Protestants, may tip the balance. So perhaps I should not doubt the importance of the actual variation among those Christians who consider themselves “evangelicals.” But after the Saddleback Church “conversations” hosted by Rick Warren, where Obama spoke easily and sincerely about his faith, few churchgoers who attended (and spoke to reporters afterward) seemed to be persuaded to actually vote for a Democrat. He was still too different, too unknown, and, some said, still not right about the “core” social issue of abortion. For many people, there is now almost 30 years of associating evangelical Protestantism with voting Republican—it may well have become a part of evangelical identity for many, a core affiliation.

Thus, at least in an election year, when elected officials, aspiring candidates, consultants, and media all have a lot at stake on shaping their appeals effectively, this practical outcome seems to me to swamp the scholarly concerns scholars have with precision and definition. If we want to know who evangelicals are, how many there are, and what they believe and how they practice, I am all for precision, nuance, and variation. But if we need to know how “they” are going to pull a voting lever regarding an either/or choice in a divided electorate, it seems to me that the global term bandied about in the media tells us what we want to know.

From Rhys H. Williams at The Immanent Frame.

Also see:

A new kind of evangelical.

A progressive evangelical movement?

October 13th, 2008

How we discovered our desire for the uncontacted savage.

The photos of grass-roofed shelters and hostile, body-painted Indians brandishing bows and arrows spread like brushfire around the globe. Survival International, an indigenous rights advocacy group, described the group as “uncontacted,” summoning celluloid fantasies of lost savages who had never seen civilization. Reporters began to describe them as “Earth’s last uncontacted tribe” who reacted violently to the “bird god” in the sky. But then the story collapsed. Meirelles stated in an interview that he had been following the group for two decades. The tribe was neither lost nor undiscovered?—?the outside world had known of them since 1910. It should have been clear from the beginning; the initial Portuguese reports never claimed the group was “uncontacted.” Introduced by sloppy reporting, this error fanned suspicions that the photos were just a hoax.

The crucial issue raised by these photos of a remote group isolated from our society is not whether, in an age of worldwide connectivity, surveillance satellites, and explosive population growth, we might still have undiscovered neighbors on a shrinking globe?—?we don’t. In fact, one of Meirelles’s friends first noticed the clearing where the tribe was found while browsing Google Earth. In truth, our reactions to and perceptions of these people reveal far more about us than about them. We easily believe that a band of hostile Indians confronting an airplane from a clearing do so out of ignorance and fear. But the likely truth is harder to face: The tribe might have threatened the observers precisely because they had encountered some of the worst aspects of our culture before, and suffered grievously. These images of a people courageously standing against us are not symbols of their ignorance, but of ours.

Meirelles says he released the photos only because petroleum executives and state authorities in Peru claimed that the forests where they wished to drill for oil were empty. A spokesperson for Peru’s state oil company, Petroperu, said that nomadic Indians were a figment of activists’ imaginations, “like the Loch Ness Monster,” and last year even Peru’s President, Alan García, questioned their existence.

The publicity may backfire; global curiosity about the tribes could prove insatiable. Since the release, Meirelles has endured a torrent of media requests and business solicitations; travel agents call him to propose “Savage Tourism.” A film team already slipped into an Indian reservation on the Peruvian side this past year, violating their travel permits while scouting locations for a reality television program, “World’s Lost Tribes.” Shortly afterward, a respiratory infection they may have brought with them killed four Indians.

Continue reading: Seed Magazine.

We drink Jim Beam. RSS Feed.