If we limited ourselves to talking about only things that are, rather
than things that might be, it'd be a very boring place, wouldn't it?
Personally I find conferences a good way to escape local homophily and
see things that are just different enough that I am invigorated and
excited all over again. Even if it is all just a lot of talk.
Joshua
stephen white wrote:
On 05/05/2007, at 2:28 AM, Mike Liebhold wrote:
I've been thinking a lot about 3D GIS lately, about interoperability of
3D objects in real world - virtual worlds like Google earth,
I'm sorry, but I'm starting to think that this geowanker's mailing
list is missing the point. You're _thinking_ about something, so you
announce a conference? Have I subscribed to a conference organiser's
list or something unrelated to geoinformatics? Maybe I'm the one who
is out of place and needs to unsubscribe?
Will we have multiple 3D geowebs? beyond harmonized 2D geodata and
geocoded hypermedia, will 3D data and media producers and service
I don't know! Invent something and make it so! The best way to predict
the future is to invent it, so why don't we get on with inventing
stuff and making stuff, so we can talk about stuff that exists? I see
no purpose or point in talking about what might be, when the effort
should concentrate on making what things should be!
I'll be leading sessions at Where2.0
(http://conferences.oreillynet.com/where2007/) and ISDE5
How does that help? None of the technologies you listed were by people
who had a complete list of technologies and talked about it at
conferences. They were invented by people who were busy inventing
things that were interesting and could be used for things.
I want to work with people who are inventing things, I want to talk
about things that have been invented, and I want to work with expanded
scope of things that have been done. I don't want to talk about vague
things like the upcoming Singularity in all of its myriad possible
forms (which are narrowed down to the one single way that it actually
happens because of things that are invented!).
Why do the people in here have so MANY conferences? NOTHING HAPPENS AT
CONFERENCES! Mouths move, air gets expelled, noise flaps the air, and
bright buttons get pinned on chests. If it were possible to be
constructive at conferences, then Einstein would have been running
around in a bunny suit while working on general relativity. Newton
would have been throwing apples at people's heads.
Instead, they stayed at home and THOUGHT... they used their minds in
conditions of peace and quiet so that all their focus could be devoted
to extracting difficult answers out of difficult questions. Isn't that
what we need now? Aren't the set of problems that we're facing in
geoinformatics and location based media really really difficult,
needing a great deal of introspective rumination to solve?
So I think I'm on the wrong list. I'm not interested in conferences
and I want to get on with the actual work. Maybe there are conferences
about the results, but I'm also not interested in that.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
--
Joshua Schachter
http://del.icio.us/joshua
http://joshua.schachter.org/
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
