Freedom To Connect — next week
I want to make sure everyone knows about the Freedom To Connect conference next week — Monday Mar. 5 and Tuesday Mar. 6. Details and schedule here. The cost to register goes up substantially tomorrow, so think about signing up today.
Here's the current agenda:
March 5, 2007 (***subject to change***)
- 8:00 AM — Registration, breakfast
- 8:45 - 10:00 AM — Jim Douglas, Governor of Vermont, intro Tom Evslin, welcome David Isenberg
- 10:00 - 10:30 AM — Break
- 10:30 - 11:15 AM — Yochai Benkler on The Wealth of Networks
- 11:15 - Noon — Panel: Benkler, kc claffy, Mark Cooper, Elliot Maxwell, Gigi Sohn
- Noon - 1:00 PM — Lunch, box lunch on premises
- 1:00 - 2:00 PM — Demos: David Smith (Qwak), Cory Ondrejka (2nd Life)
- 2:00 - 2:45 PM — Enabling Technologies — James Salter, John Waclawsky, Sanjit Biswas
- 2:45 - 3:15 PM — Break
- 3:15 - 4:00 PM — Network Enabled Government, Rep. Steve Urquhart (Politicopia), Fred Hassani (Intellipedia), Micah Sifry (Sunlight Foundation), Allison Fine (Moderator)
- 4:00 - 4:30 PM — tbd
- 4:30 - 4:45 PM — Jeff Chester on Digital Destiny
- 4:45 - 5:00 PM — Book signing preview, Allison Fine (Momentum), Yochai Benkler (Wealth of Networks) & Reed Hundt (In China's Shadow)
- 5:30 - 8:30 PM — Reception/book signing in nearby restaurant, reception keynote by David Weinberger
March 6, 2007 (***subject to change***)
- 8:00 AM — Registration, breakfast
- 8:45 - 9:00 AM — Welcome to Day 2, David Isenberg
- 9:00 - 9:45 AM — Peer Production News Panel, Dan Gillmor, Mark Tapscott, Bill Allison, Jonathan Krim (moderator)
- 9:45 - 10:30 AM — Community Networks Panel, Sascha Meinrath, Michael Calabrese, Becca Vargo Daggett, Drew Clark (Moderator)
- 10:30 - 11:00 AM — Break
- 11:00 - Noon — FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, Ron Sege (intro).
- Noon - 1:00 PM — Lunch, box lunch on premises
- 1:00 - 1:20 PM — Demos: Yuval Klein (Plymedia), Nora Abousteit (Burda Style)
- 1:20 - 2:30 — Adam Thierer, Peter Swire, Jim Baller
- 2: 30 - 3:00 PM — Break
- 3:00 - 4:00 PM — Susan Crawford, Reed Hundt
- 4:00 - 5:00 PM — Bruce Sterling sums up (with Jasmina Tesanovic).
- 5:00 PM — Adjourn
Smolin report
People who wander by this blog will know that I'm a fan of Lee Smolin, whose Life of the Cosmos was my favorite book five years ago. I recently read his 2007 book: The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next.
The first half of Trouble with Physics is heavy sledding for a music major. Smolin is showing that while string theory has led to some worthwhile avenues of study, it's not a testable theory. It just can't be proven — in fact, it can't even be defined. It doesn't confirm or suggest anything beyond itself, and it can't be explained. Smolin describes the work of many brilliant people who have devoted their careers to string theory, and describes what they've been working on. Most of this was very hard for me to understand, but I think I got the point that string theory is the emperor's new clothes.
But it's not just the emperor — there's an entire metropolis of physicists who are similarly clad, according to Smolin. String theory is the dominant and domineering course of study. The theory is a kind of academic faith that cannot be gainsaid (and if you doubt, you're out). In fact, you probably won't be able to get a job as a physicist in the first place if you haven't lined up behind the theory.
The second half of the book, the cultural part, is fascinating. Smolin remembers that when he began his career there were giants around — real seers who were doing experimental, idiosyncratic work. Huge strides were being made in physics. Then string theory took over and progress stopped. Nothing has happened in at least twenty years, he argues; none of the big questions are being answered, and string theory doesn't show any signs of being helpful in answering those questions.
He's disturbed that physics has become characterized by groupthink, and he thinks the academic system is doing it. Not the people, the system. Academics spend a lot of time reviewing the work of other academics and ranking them. In the sciences, the academics are looking for grants, and those are given out based on a lot of conservative ranking work as well. The seniors shape the juniors, and the juniors start asking themselves how Prof. X or Prof. Y view their work instead of asking themselves how their work is contributing to science. So the whole ethic of scientific inquiry is disturbed; outliers don't get the time or independence to be alone and think, because they're too busy getting on the trail towards quiet, approved-of seniordom themselves.
Smolin wants physicists to encourage young seers, young outliers who are having interesting ideas but may not have any results to show for them. The craftspeople don't make scientific advances, in his view. He's interested in getting away from “normal” science and encouraging big foundational inquiries. It sounds as if he himself has been broad-ranging, interested in everything, happy to shape his own destiny. But even Smolin didn't question some assertions about string theory that turned out not to be adequately proven, according to him.
My favorite part of this cultural history is the “time alone” section — Smolin describes the careers of a few young seers that were lucky enough to go off by themselves and read deeply and widely. Years later, they emerged with startling insights and well-informed critical views.
Law is different from science. My colleagues let me write about anything I want to, and I don't have to get grants in order to survive. (Thank you, legal educational system.) It is true, though, that there's a rush to be “productive” (I remember when that word made me smile — now it's just part of the lexicon) at a very early point in your career, and you certainly don't get years alone to read everything under the sun. There are certainly seniors and juniors.
So I recommend this book to anyone who is curious about almost anything. Do your best to work through the first part, gaze out the window once in a while, and then absorb the second part. It may stay with you for a while.