The Year In Ideas

matthewg writes: "This week's New York Times Magazine (free registration required) consists primarily of a special feature, The Year In Ideas. Subtitled 'An encyclopedia of innovations, conceptual leaps, harebrained schemes, cultural tremors, & hindsight reckonings that made a difference in 2001,' the feature describes 80 different "notions, inventions, conceptual swerves and philosophical leaps that mattered this year and may well continue to matter in years to come" in between a couple of paragraphs and half a page. Complete with illustrations which range from informative to whimsical, it covers a lot of interesting ideas, many of which will probably be new to you. The article's subjects include such Slashdot-fodder as software as speech, steganography Goes Digital, and collaborative composition, as well as a plethora of intriguing new ideas, such as new ideas in basic rights and global warming lawsuits. And, of course, the solution to every Slashdotter's woes."

Comments

Speed Dating = Job Fair?

[Alien54]

t's all about as romantic as a job fair

now that is a bothersome image. - Socializing with all the romance of a job fair.

But if nothing else is working for your, then why not?

I can see this sort of working out if the atmosphere is right. Otherwise it would be a prime target for satire on SNL.

Passenger jets as bombs

[deafgreatdane]

When I think of the last year and ideas that are "conceptual swerves ... that mattered this year and may well continue to matter in years to come", I think of the idea of taking passenger jets, and viewing them as big bombs. They have navigation systems, a destructive payload (mass and jet fuel), and very few places in the world have defences against them.

It sure changed the perspectives of millions of people, lot the least of which includes the thousands in the direct application of the idea.

We shouldn't limit the list of ideas to humanitarian advances.

-benJ

Open Source Celebrities

[bumperson]

This idea is interesting: The Open-Source Celebrity. According to the article:

• There you have it: celebrities, as we know them, are fictional characters. Sure, yes, there's a real person named Michael Stipe, who says actual things and goes to real restaurants and eats food and does other actual stuff. But there's also a character named ''Michael Stipe'' who exists as a kind of collectively agreed-upon fictive construct. Of course, this character is loosely based on the real-life Michael Stipe. For example, they look quite similar. But according to the Junod Doctrine, ''Michael Stipe'' - the character - is more real than Michael Stipe the person. Further, he exists in the public domain, like the Linux operating system. Everyone is free to tinker at will; we can ascribe actions, ambitions, desires and quotes to him as we see fit. He belongs to all of us. All celebrities do. And not in an obtuse, metaphorical, ''Princess Diana belonged to all of us'' kind of way, but in a direct, hands-on, dance-puppet-dance kind of way.