Tag Archives: Two Cultures

China and nanotechnology

it’s been quite a while since I’ve come across any material about Nanopolis, a scientific complex in China devoted to nanotechnology (as described in my September 26, 2014 posting titled, More on Nanopolis in China’s Suzhou Industrial Park). Note: The most recent , prior to now, information about the complex is in my June 1, 2017 posting, which mentions China’s Nanopolis and Nano-X endeavours.

Dr. Mahbube K. Siddiki’s March 12, 2022 article about China’s nanotechnology work in the Small Wars Journal provides a situation overview and an update along with a tidbit about Nanopolis, Note: Footnotes for the article have not been included here,

The Nanotechnology industry in China is moving forward, with substantially high levels of funding, a growing talent pool, and robust international collaborations. The strong state commitment to support this field of science and technology is a key advantage for China to compete with leading forces like US, EU, Japan, and Russia. The Chinese government focuses on increasing competitiveness in nanotechnology by its inclusion as strategic industry in China’s 13th Five-Year Plan, reconfirming state funding, legislative and regulatory support. Research and development (R&D) in Nanoscience and Nanotechnology is a key component of the ambitious ‘Made in China 2025’ initiative aimed at turning China into a high-tech manufacturing powerhouse [1].

A bright example of Chinese nanotech success is the world’s largest nanotech industrial zone called ‘Nanopolis’, located in the eastern city of Suzhou. This futuristic city houses several private multinationals and new Chinese startups across different fields of nanotechnology and nanoscience. Needless to say, China leads the world’s nanotech startups. Involvement of private sector opens new and unique pools of funding and talent, focusing on applied research. Thus, private sector is leading in R&D in China, where state-sponsored institutions still dominate in all other sectors of rapid industrialization and modernization. From cloning to cancer research, from sea to space exploration, this massive and highly populated nation is using nanoscience and nanotechnology innovation to drive some of the world’s biggest breakthroughs, which is raising concerns in many other competing countries [3].

China has established numerous nanotech research institutions throughout the country over the years. Prominent universities like Peking University, City University of Hong Kong, Nanjing University, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Soochow University, University of Science and Technology of China are the leading institutions that house state of art nanotech research labs to foster study and research of nanoscience and nanotechnology [5]. Chinese Academy of Science (CAS), National Center for Nanoscience and Technology (NCNST) and Suzhou Institute of Nano-Tech and Nano-Bionics (SINANO) are top among the state sponsored specialized nanoscience and nanotechnology research centers, which have numerous labs and prominent researchers to conduct cutting edge research in the area of nanotechnology. Public-Private collaboration along with the above mentioned research institutes gave birth to many nanotechnology companies, most notable of them are Array Nano, Times Nano, Haizisi Nano Technology, Nano Medtech, Sun Nanotech, XP nano etc. [6]. These companies are thriving on the research breakthroughs China achieved recently in this sector. 

Here are some of the notable achievements in this sector by China. In June 2020, an international team of researchers led by Chinese scientists developed a new form of synthetic and  biodegradable nanoparticle [7]. This modifiable lipid nanoparticle is capable of targeting, penetrating, and altering cells by delivering the CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing tool into a cell. This novel nanoparticle can be used in the treatment of some gene related disorders, as well as other diseases including some forms of cancer in the brain, liver, and lungs. At the State Key Laboratory of Robotics in the northeast city of Shenyang, researchers have developed a laser that produces a tiny gas bubble[8]. This bubble can be used as a tiny “robot” to manipulate and move materials on a nanoscale with microscopic precision. The technology termed as “Bubble bot” promises new possibilities in the field of artificial tissue creation and cloning [9].

In another report [13] it was shown that China surpassed the U.S. in chemistry in 2018 and now leading the later with a significant gap, which might take years to overcome. In the meantime, the country is approaching the US in Earth & Environmental sciences as well as physical sciences. According to the trend China may take five years or less to surpass US. On the contrary, in life science research China is lagging the US quite significantly, which might be attributed to both countries’ priority of sponsorship, in terms of funding. In fact, in the time of CORONA pandemic, US can use this gap for her strategic gain over China.

Outstanding economic growth and rapid technological advances of China over the last three decades have given her an unprecedented opportunity to play a leading role in contemporary geopolitical competition. The United States, and many of her partners and allies in the west as well as in Asia, have a range of concerns about how the authoritarian leadership in Beijing maneuver [sic] its recently gained power and position on the world stage. They are warily observing this regime’s deployment of sophisticated technology like “Nano” in ways that challenge many of their core interests and values all across the world. Though the U.S. is considered the only superpower in the world and has maintained its position as the dominant power of technological innovation for decades, China has made massive investments and swiftly implemented policies that have contributed significantly to its technological innovation, economic growth, military capability, and global influence. In some areas, China has eclipsed, or is on the verge of eclipsing, the United States — particularly in the rapid deployment of certain technologies, and nanoscience and nanotechnology appears to be the leading one. …

[About Dr. Siddiki]

Dr. Siddiki is an instructor of Robotic and Autonomous System in the Department of Multi-Domain Operations at the [US] Army Management Staff College where he teaches and does research in that area. He was Assistant Teaching Professor of Electrical Engineering at the Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering in the School of Computing and Engineering at University of Missouri Kansas City (UMKC). In UMKC, Dr. Siddiki designed, developed and taught undergraduate and graduate level courses, and supervised research works of Ph.D., Master and undergraduate students. Dr. Siddiki’s research interests lie in the area of nano and quantum tech, Robotic and Autonomous System, Green Energy & Power, and their implications in geopolitics.

As you can see in the article, there are anxieties over China’s rising dominance with regard to scientific research and technology; these anxieties have become more visible since I started this blog in 2008.

I was piqued to see that Dr. Siddiki’s article is in the Small Wars Journal and not in a journal focused on science, research, technology, and/or economics. I found this explanation for the term, ‘small wars’ on the journal’s About page (Note: A link has been removed),

Small Wars” is an imperfect term used to describe a broad spectrum of spirited continuation of politics by other means, falling somewhere in the middle bit of the continuum between feisty diplomatic words and global thermonuclear war.  The Small Wars Journal embraces that imperfection.

Just as friendly fire isn’t, there isn’t necessarily anything small about a Small War.

The term “Small War” either encompasses or overlaps with a number of familiar terms such as counterinsurgency, foreign internal defense, support and stability operations, peacemaking, peacekeeping, and many flavors of intervention.  Operations such as noncombatant evacuation, disaster relief, and humanitarian assistance will often either be a part of a Small War, or have a Small Wars feel to them.  Small Wars involve a wide spectrum of specialized tactical, technical, social, and cultural skills and expertise, requiring great ingenuity from their practitioners.  The Small Wars Manual (a wonderful resource, unfortunately more often referred to than read) notes that:

Small Wars demand the highest type of leadership directed by intelligence, resourcefulness, and ingenuity. Small Wars are conceived in uncertainty, are conducted often with precarious responsibility and doubtful authority, under indeterminate orders lacking specific instructions.

The “three block war” construct employed by General Krulak is exceptionally useful in describing the tactical and operational challenges of a Small War and of many urban operations.  Its only shortcoming is that is so useful that it is often mistaken as a definition or as a type of operation.

Who Are Those Guys?

Small Wars Journal is NOT a government, official, or big corporate site. It is run by Small Wars Foundation, a non-profit corporation, for the benefit of the Small Wars community of interest. The site principals are Dave Dilegge (Editor-in-Chief) and Bill Nagle (Publisher), and it would not be possible without the support of myriad volunteers as well as authors who care about this field and contribute their original works to the community. We do this in our spare time, because we want to.  McDonald’s pays more.  But we’d rather work to advance our noble profession than watch TV, try to super-size your order, or interest you in a delicious hot apple pie.  If and when you’re not flipping burgers, please join us.

The overview and analysis provided by Dr. Siddiki is very interesting to me and absent any conflicting data, I’m assuming it’s solid work. As for the anxiety that permeates the article, this is standard. All countries are anxious about who’s winning the science and technology race. If memory serves, you can find an example of the anxiety in C.P. Snow’s classic lecture and book, Two Cultures (the book is “The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution”) given/published in 1959. The British scientific establishment was very concerned that it was being eclipsed by the US and by the Russians.

Inside Dogma Lab; an ArtSci Salon event on March 25, 2021

This event is taking place at 7 am PDT. Should you still be interested, here are more details from a March 17, 2021 ArtSci Salon announcement (received via email; you can also find the information on the artscisalon.com/dogmalab/ webpage) provides descriptions of the talk and the artists after the registration and viewing information,

Benjamin Bacon & Vivian Xu –  Inside Dogma Lab – exploring new media
ecologies


Thursday, March 25 [2021]

10 am EDT, 4 pm GST, 10 pm CST [ 7 am PDT]

This session will stream on Zoom and YouTube

Register in advance for this meeting:

https://utoronto.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZMlfuyrpz4jG9aTl-Y8sAwn6Q75CPEpWRsM

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing
information about joining the meeting.

See more here:
https://artscisalon.com/dogmalab/

Or on Facebook:

https://facebook.com/artscisalon

Description

This ArtSci Salon /LASER morning event is inspired by the NewONE,
Learning without borders, a program at the University of Toronto
dedicated to interdisciplinary pedagogies and ecological learning
experiences. Art technology and science are waved together and inform
each other. The arts here are not simply used to illustrate or to
narrate, but to transmit, and make sense of complexity without falling
into given disciplinary and instrumental containers. The artistic medium
becomes simultaneously a catalyst for interrogating nature and a new
research tools able to display and communicate its complexity.

With this event, we welcome interdisciplinary artists Benjamin Bacon and
Vivian Xu.

Their transdisciplinary design lab, the Dogma Lab (http://dogma.org/, not only combines a diverse range of mediums (including software,
hardware, networked systems, online platforms, raw data, biomaterials
and living organisms), but also considers “the entanglement of
technological systems with other realities, including surveillance, sensory, bodily, environmental, and living systems. They are interested in complex hybrid networks that bridge the digital with the physical and biological realms, speculating on possible synthesized futures”.

Their research outcomes both individually and collectively have taken
the form of interfaces, wearables, toolkits, machines, musical
instruments, compositions and performances, public installations,
architectural spectacles and educational programs.

Situated in China, they have an invested interest in understanding and
participating in local design, technology and societal discourse, as
well how China as a local actor affects the dynamic of the larger global
system.

Bios

Benjamin Bacon is an inter-disciplinary artist, designer and musician
that works at the intersection of computational design, networked
systems, data, sound, installation and mechanical sculpture. He is
currently Associate Professor of Media and Art and Director of Signature
Work at Duke Kunshan University. He is also a lifetime fellow at V2_ Lab
for the Unstable Media in Rotterdam, Netherlands.

He has exhibited or performed his work in the USA, Europe, Iran, and
China such as the National Art Museum of  China (Beijing), Gallery Ho
(NYC), Wave Gotik Treffen (Germany), Chelsea Museum (NYC), Millennium
Museum (Beijing), Plug-In Gallery (Switzerland), Beijing Design Week,
Shenzhen Bay Science Technology and Arts Festival, the  Shanghai
Symphony Hall. Most recently his mechanical life and AI sculpture PROBE
– AVERSO SPECILLO DI  DUCENDUM was collected by the UNArt Center in
Shanghai, China.

https://www.benjaminbacon.studio/ [3]

Vivian Xu is a Beijing-born media artist, designer, researcher and
educator. Her work explores the boundaries  between bio and electronic
media in creating new forms of machine logic, speculative life and
sensory systems  often taking the form of objects, machines,
installations and wearable. Her work has been presented at various
institutions in China, the US, Europe and Australia.

She is an Assistant Professor of Media and Arts at Duke Kunshan
University. She has lectured, held research positions at various
institutions including Parsons New School for Design, New York
University Shanghai, and the Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen).

https://www.vivianxu.studio/

This event is hosted by ArtSci Salon @ The Fields Institute for
Research in Mathematical Sciences, the NewOne @ UofT and is part of
Leonardo/ISAST LASER TALKS. LASER is a program of international
gatherings that bring artists, scientists, humanists and technologists
together for informal presentations, performances and conversations with
the wider public. The mission of the LASERs is to encourage contribution
to the cultural environment of a region by fostering interdisciplinary
dialogue and opportunities for community building to over 40 cities
around the world. To learn more about how our LASER Hosts and to visit a
LASER near you please visit our website: leonardo.info/laser-talks [5].
@lasertalks_

Interesting timing: two Michaels and Meng Wanzhou

Given the tensions between Canada and China these days, this session with China-based artists intrigues for more than the usual reasons.

For anyone unfamiliar with the situation, here’s a quick recap: Meng Wanzhou, deputy board chair and chief financial officer (CFO) of telecom giant, Huawei, which was founded by her father Ren Zhengfei. has been detained, at a US government request and in accordance with a treaty, since 2018 in one of her two multimillion dollar mansions in Vancouver, Canada. She wears an electronic bracelet for surveillance purposes, must be escorted on her shopping trips and other excursions, and must abide by an 11 pm – 7 am curfew. She is currently fighting extradition to the US with an extensive team of Canadian lawyers.

In what has been widely perceived as retaliatory, China shortly after Meng Wanzhou’s arrest put two Canadians, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, wre arrested and put in prison allowing only severely limited contact with Canadian consular officials. As I write this on March 22, 2021, brief trials have been held (Friday, March 19, 2021 and Monday, March 22, 2021) for both Michaels, no outside observers allowed. It’s unclear as to which or how many lawyers are arguing in defence of either Michael. Sentences will be given at some time in the future.

Tensions are very high indeed.

Moving on to links

You can find the Dogma Lab here. As for Leonardo/ISAST, there is an interesting history,

The journal Leonardo was founded in 1968 in Paris by kinetic artist and astronautical pioneer Frank Malina. Malina saw the need for a journal that would serve as an international channel of communication among artists, with emphasis on the writings of artists who use science and developing technologies in their work. After the death of Frank Malina in 1981 and under the leadership of his son, Roger F. Malina, Leonardo moved to San Francisco, California, as the flagship journal of the newly founded nonprofit organization Leonardo/The International Society for the Arts, Sciences and Technology (Leonardo/ISAST). Leonardo/ISAST has grown along with its community and today is the leading organization for artists, scientists and others interested in the application of contemporary science and technology to the arts and music.

Frank Malina, founder of Leonardo, was an American scientist. After receiving his PhD from the California Institute of Technology in 1936, Malina directed the WAC Corporal program that put the first rocket beyond the Earth’s atmosphere. He co-founded and was the second director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), co-founded the Aerojet General Corporation and was an active participant in rocket-science development in the period leading up to and during World War II.

Invited to join the United Nations Education, Science and Culture Organization (UNESCO) in 1947 by Julian Huxley, Malina moved to Paris as the director of the organization’s science programs. The separation between science and the humanities was the subject of intense debate during the post-war period, particularly after the publication of C.P. Snow’s Two Cultures in 1959. The concept that there was and should be a natural relationship between science and art fascinated Malina, eventually influencing him to synthesize his scientific experience with his long-standing artistic sensibilities. As an artist, Malina moved from traditional media to mesh, string and canvas constructions and finally to experiments with light, which led to his development of systems for kinetic painting.

Here’s a description of the LASER talks from the Leonardo/ISAST LASER Talks event page,

… a program of international gatherings that bring artists, scientists, humanists and technologists together for informal presentations, performances and conversations with the wider public. The mission of LASER is to encourage contribution to the cultural environment of a region by fostering interdisciplinary dialogue and opportunities for community building.

There are two talks scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday, March 23, 2021 and four talks for Thursday, March 25, 2021 with more scheduled for April on the Leonardo/ISAST LASER Talks event page,

You can find out more about the New College at the University of Toronto here where the New One: Learning without Borders programme is offered. BTW, New College was founded in 1962. You can get more information on their Why New College page.

Inspiring kids, again? High schoolers at Argonne National Laboratory

C. P. Snow’s 1959 lecture and book, Two Cultures, spends a fair chunk of time on the issue of encouraging the next generation to study science and engineering. As Snow perceived the problem, the UK was falling behind both the US and Russia in the science race. I haven’t investigated what the perceptions were in the US and Russia at the time but I have noticed that descriptions of the race to get someone on the moon feature a great deal of anxiety in the US about Russian supremacy in science. Given human nature, I imagine the Russians were worried too. Plus ça change, n’est ce pas?

Today, everyone is worried that someone else is going to get there (wherever that might be) first and there is enormous pressure internationally to inspire the next generation to pursue science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers.

I see that the Argonne National Laboratory in the US has opened up its doors to high schoolers for a special programme. From the June 6, 2012 news item by Tona Kunz on Nanowerk,

In commencement speeches across the country, graduates have , been warned to expect rocky times breaking into the workforce. Unemployment hovers between 8 and 9 percent. Competition is tough.

Unless you studied science or engineering. Those jobs have a 2 percent unemployment rate, which has led some Fortune 500 companies to complain about offices they can’t fill.

So it’s no surprise that when the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Argonne National Laboratory decided to give high school students a chance to test-drive a science career, it found students, parents and school officials from Naperville, Ill. eager to hop on board.

Kunz’s June 6, 2012 news release on the Argonne National Laboratory website mentions (Note: I have removed links from the excerpt),

…  Teachers received training in the workings of the Advanced Photon Source (APS), the brightest high-energy X-ray machine in the Western Hemisphere, and the Electron Miscroscopy Center (EMC). Students from Naperville’s two high schools then competed for slots on four research teams that used X-ray beams to decipher what matter is made of, how it’s built and how it reacts.

More than 5,000 researchers from throughout the world use the APS and EMC annually to target society’s greatest challenges: how to make better pharmaceuticals, sustainable fuels and high-performance materials. These challenges will feed scientific jobs for decades to come.

“I think there is a huge push in our district from the community for STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) education,” said Tricia Noblett, a teacher and science club advisor at Neuqua Valley High School. “I think they are seizing on what has been out there in the media that STEM fields are where the jobs are and that science careers can be interesting.”

Students drew on experiences in their lives to choose research topics and explained their results to scientists at the annual meeting held in May at Argonne for users of the APS, EMC and Center for Nanoscale Materials (CNM).

Inspired by the recent cleanup of a contaminated portion of the west branch of the DuPage River near their school, one group of students studied how to increase the efficiency of water filtration systems.

Another group worked with the Naperville wastewater facility to evaluate how corrosion affects the lifespan of water pipes.

And another group looked at how to improve the efficiency of graphene, a nanomaterial that may hold the key to building faster semiconductors for smart phones and the next-generation of research tools.

It’s exciting stuff and I’m always glad to have a chance to pass on information about these kinds of programmes. As for the history, I find it interesting to note the similarities with and the differences from the past.

Celebrating 350 years of the Royal Society’s Library

The One Culture Festival, which took place this last weekend (Oct. 2-3, 2011), celebrates the 350th anniversary of the Royal Society’s Library (my Dec. 2, 2010 posting noted the Royal Society kicked off its 350th anniversary with a report). One assumes that the Royal Society was founded some months before the library was created. From the introduction to the festival by Professor Uta Frith,

This year we are celebrating the anniversary of the foundation of the library and collections of the Royal Society. It all started small, with a single book, and a tiny one at that. Diplomat, natural philosopher and founder member of the Royal Society, Kenelm Digby donated this gift and thereby inspired others to do likewise. In this way he initiated what has now grown into a national treasure. What could be more fitting for a celebration than a festival for literature, arts and science! Its apt name ‘One Culture’ confronts the famous C.P. Snow lecture “Two Cultures” (1959), which pointed out that modern society suffered from a lack of communication between sciences and humanities, and reminds us that the separation of science from other cultural achievements is both artificial and unnecessary.

Here’s a description of some of the festival events from Anna Perman’s Oct. 3, 2011 post for the Guardian Science blogs (Notes and Theories; Dispatches from the Science Desk),

This weekend at the Royal Society, the One Culture festival explored the sweeping narratives and the smaller dramas of science and literature, of individual scientists and their great ideas. Science’s most elite club opened its doors to writers like Sebastian Faulks, Michael Frayn, John Banville; dancers from the Rambert Dance Company; Take the Space theatre company; and scientists who manage to combine artistic pursuits with a research career.

In his conversation with Uta Frith on Sunday, Sebastian Faulks described how he starts with a big idea, then narrows his focus to a story that can illustrate it, and the characters who can make that possible: much like a scientist, who starts with a question about how the world works and narrows the focus of their microscope to the tiny part of it that can answer that question. Through focusing on single molecules of human existence, Faulks reveals the wider truths about humanity.

For the Rambert Dance Company, and their scientist in residence Nicky Clayton, the big ideas of science have informed some of their most challenging dances. For them, the boundaries of “science” and “art” are artificial – what links them is far more basic. As Mark Baldwin, director of Rambert, put it:

“The commonalities at the base of it all are enormous. We’re talking about ideas.”

The ideas they both get excited about are big, abstract ones. Clayton, as scientist in residence at Rambert, talks to the dancers about scientific ideas. She has to think carefully about what can be put into movement. For her, these movements are not just a way of communicating, or illustrating these ideas. They are about inspiration. And this inspiration has found its way back into her science, as shown by this video from Cambridge University (note the opening Stephen Fry voiceover!) [I will be placing the video a little further down.]

Both in this article and in Frith’s introduction there’s a description of C. P. Snow’s 1959 book (originally a lecture), Two Cultures as being about the two cultures of art and science. I read it a few years ago and found that Snow also opined at length about the developed and developing worlds, science education, and worries over Britain’s science primacy being threatened. I probably wouldn’t have noticed the other themes since the art/science theme is the first idea he mentions and he offers personal anecdotes about his experiences, which makes it more memorable, if I hadn’t come across a commentary pointing out these other themes in the book. (I did post about Two Cultures, May 8, 2009 on its 50th anniversary. [scroll down about 1/3 of the way])

Here’s the video featuring Nicky Clayton, scientist-in-residence with the Rambert Dance Company. Prepare yourself for birds and Argentine tango.

Nano augments reality; PEN’s consumer nano products inventory goes mobile and interactive; Two Cultures; Michael Geller’s ‘Look at Vancouver’ event

There was a nanotechnology mention hidden in a recent article (Augmented Reality is Both a Fad and the Future — Here’s Why by Farhad Manjoo in Fast Company) about a new iPhone application by Yelp, Monocle. From the article,

Babak Parviz, a bio-nanotechnologist at the University of Washington, has been working on augmented-reality contact lenses that would layer computer graphics on everything around us — in other words, we’d have Terminator eyes. “We have a vast amount of data on the Web, but today we see it on a flat screen,” says Michael Zöllner, an augmented-reality researcher at Germany’s Fraunhofer Institute for Computer Graphics Research. “It’s only a small step to see all of it superimposed on our lives.” Much of this sounds like a comic-book version of technology, and indeed, all of this buzz led the research firm Gartner to put AR on its “hype cycle” for emerging technologies — well on its way to the “peak of inflated expectations.”

Manjoo goes on to note that augmented reality is not new although he’s not able to go back to the 1890s as I did in yesterday’s (Nov. 11, 2009) posting about using clouds to display data.

The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN) has produced an exciting new iPhone application, findNano which allows users to access PEN’s consumer products inventory via their mobile phones. From the news item on Azonano,

findNano allows users to browse an inventory of more than 1,000 nanotechnology-enabled consumer products, from sporting goods to food products and electronics to toys, using the iPhone and iPod Touch. Using the built-in camera, iPhone users can even submit new nanotech products to be included in future inventory updates.

That bit about users submitting information for their database reminds me of a news item about scientists in the UK setting up a database that can be accessed by mobile phones allowing ordinary citizens to participate in gathering science information (I posted about it here). I wonder how PEN will track participation and if they will produce a report on the results (good and/or bad).

One thing I did notice is that PEN’s consumer products inventory has over 1000 items while the new European inventory I mentioned in my Nov. 10, 2009 posting has 151 items.

I finally finished reading The Two Cultures: and A Second Look (a publication of the text for the original talk along with an updated view) by C. P. Snow. This year is the 50th anniversary. My interest in Snow’s talk was reanimated  by Andrew Maynard’s postings about the anniversary and the talk in his 2020 Science blog. He has three commentaries starting here with a poll, and his May 5, 2009 and May 6, 2009 postings on the topic.

I had heard of The Two Cultures but understood it to be about the culture gap between the sciences and the arts/humanities. This is a profound misunderstanding of Snow’s talk/publication which was more concerned with raising the standard of living and health globally. Snow’s second look was a failed attempt to redress the misunderstanding.

From a writer’s perspective, his problem started with the title which sets the frame for his whole talk. He then opened with a discussion of literary intellectuals and scientists (bringing us back to the number two), their differences and the culture gap that ensues. Finally, over 1/2 of his talk was over by the time he started the serious discussion about extending the benefits of what he termed ‘the scientific revolution’ globally.

It’s an interesting read and some of it (the discussion about education) is still quite timely.

Michael Geller,  local architect, planner, real estate consultant, and developer in Vancouver (Canada), has organized an event to review the happenings in the city since the last election in 2008. From the news release (on Frances Bula’s blog),

SATURDAY NOVEMBER 14, 20009 marks the one year anniversary of the last election day in Vancouver; a day that resulted in a significant change in the political landscape and leadership of our city.  The purpose of this event is to mark this anniversary with a review of the highlights of the past year in Vancouver municipal politics, particularly in terms of the accomplishments of Council and staff in the areas of housing, planning and development; fiscal management and economic development; and leadership.

The event will be held at the Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue (lower level) at 515 West Hastings from 8:00 am to 12:30 pm. Admission by donation. Geller has arranged a pretty interesting lineup for his three panel discussions although one of the commenters on Bula’s blog is highly unimpressed with both the speakers and anyone who might foolishly attend.

Copyright and The Economist, Two Cultures, and some spoken word iconoclasm

Thanks to the folks at Techdirt I found out that The Economist is having an interactive debate about copyright. They propose this, This house believes that existing copyright laws do more harm than good. They’ve invited two law professors to present competing pro and con views and readers can offer their own comments. It’s a lively debate and you can go check it out here.

I have mixed feelings on the topic although I lean towards agreement with this particular proposition. As someone who produces content, I don’t want to see anyone cheated of credit and/or monetary reward for their (my) work. Unfortunately copyright laws are being used to stifle the lively exchange of ideas and materials. For example, I just read a very bizarre interpretation of copyright in my local daily paper (The Vancouver Sun, Saturday, May 2, 2009) by Harvey Enchin. Apparently adding links to The Vancouver Sun website is infringing on their copyright. I’d rather not quote from him, even with attribution, as I’m sure he’d consider that an infringement. Can anyone out there explain how providing a link to a website e.g. The Economist infringes on their copyright? I haven’t appropriated their content (I have noted the text of the motion that propels the debate [in the interest of full disclosure, sometimes I quote from an article but never reproduce the article  in its entirety]). Plus, I am driving traffic to their website which, theoretically, should enable them to raise their advertising rates. Where’s the problem?

As far as I’m concerned, the whole area of intellectual property law (copyright, trademarks, and patents) is being appropriated by bullies who use existing legislation to intimidate the very people they claim to be protecting.

There’s a good discussion taking place on Andrew Maynard’s 2020 Science blog about C. P. Snow’s Two Cultures (humanities/arts and sciences). It’s a 1959 lecture that was eventually published and has proved to be quite influential. (Hmmm…Richard Feynman’s lecture, There’s plenty of the room at the bottom, was given in 1959…interesting year.) There’s also an editorial in Nature about Two Cultures. Both Maynard and the Nature editor claim that the ‘wall’ between the sciences and the humanities/arts is less formidable than it was 50 years *ago. I find it interesting that Maynard, a scientist, and the Nature editor (presumably someone versed in the sciences) are making the claim. Are there any writers or artists would agree? Here’s Maynard’s blog and Nature’s editorial. (The editorial is the one article which is not behind a paywall.)

Spoken word artist, musician, and poet, Heather Haley will be performing on Monday, May 11, 2009 at The Beaumont Studios, 315 West 5th Avenue, Vancouver, BC. Admission is $7 and the doors open at 7:15. From the news release,

AURAL Heather @ Vancouver City Limits.

Musical Showcase at Beaumont Studios
w/Christina Maria and Petunia with the Viper Band

AURAL Heather is the new weather! A unique, sublime fusion of song and spoken word by poet-iconoclast-vocalist Heather Haley and dazzling guitarist-producer, Roderick Shoolbraid.

You can check out some of Heather’s work here and you can check out the Beaumont Studios here.

*’ago’ added Sept. 12, 2017.