Technical Difficulties.

Last night I had a bit of a surprise when I checked my e-mail. There was a message from the folks at Blogger.com with a prominent header- it cited my URL and warned that there was "ACTION REQUIRED". When I opened it I was informed that Serendipity had been tagged as a "potential spam blog". I was instructed to respond by requesting a review, and cautioned that if I didn't do so my blog would be deleted in twenty days. Obviously this got my attention. After more than two years of continuous blogging, I would be devastated to learn that it was gone forever. My father has started cataloging my posts on paper, but he is still at the beginning stage of the process. I couldn't ask him to finish the job in the next two and a half weeks.

A lot of scenarios ran through my mind. When I first opened the e-mail, it occurred to me that it might be some type of Internet scam. You have to be on guard whenever a message tells you that there is "ACTION REQUIRED". Maybe there is some sort of problem with your credit card, and they need your social security number and bank account information. Perhaps they forgot what your password is and need a simple refresher. Variations on this theme are virtually endless. I was told that I could get the necessary review by "filling out a form" at a prescribed link. I was leery about even clicking on it. What if I got some kind of virus? Truly my "Spidey-sense" was tingling.

It didn't take me long to realize that this problem was on the level. For one thing, it was a page from the official Blogger site. I have to give these guys credit for breaking down everything into easily digested particles. Quickly I was brought up to speed regarding Blogger's commitment to eliminate spam. Apparently they search for this annoyingly intrusive data distribution technique with something called an "automated classifier". In their own words, "Automatic spam detection is inherently fuzzy." The assumption is that if their "ACTION REQUIRED" message is responded to, then they have likely made a "false positive". They were quick to point out that they "sincerely apologize for this error".

My first thoughts were that this would be a tremendous inconvenience (if not a tragedy should they decide to erase my blog). If you are a regular reader, you are no doubt aware that I attempt to post every single day, and that I rarely miss a post. I was preparing to skip (at least) the entire weekend, because they said that it would take two business days to conduct their review. I vainly wondered how that would decrease my traffic. Yet I must admit that at some level I felt like it would be a reprieve from having to get something written for this weekend. It turned out (obviously) that this wouldn't be an issue. My blog privileges were restored approximately 14 hours after my request for a review.

I also have to admit that I suspected personal sabotage. For a moment I thought that someone had attempted to do me in. I guess that sort of paranoia is just typical of the age we live in. When I noticed that I couldn't post to the Digging Pitt blog, I suspected a coordinated effort to undermine the local arts scene. But with the assistance of an e-mail from Susan over at oranje, I determined that a lot of blogs were affected at the same time by Blogger's overzealous robots. Anyway, Sus told me that the online community is furious about it, and considering jumping ship. I still don't understand exactly why it happened to me (perhaps it's because my recent posts contain a lot of links to other sites), but I've invested too much to change to a different service. So Blogger-dudes, I hope you know that you're stuck with me.

If we stumble upon the Fountain of Youth...

It seems to me that we live in an era of unbridled enthusiasm for science and technology. Just about the only criticism I see directed against these aims comes from the Christian Right. The arguments from that camp are faith-based rather than determined by logic. The praise in secular segments of society for the "march of scientific progress" almost assumes the trappings of religion. It's a result of an unquestioned acceptance that technology is ultimately "good". But what historical evidence do we have to back that position? The student of Twentieth Century history can easily find a number of examples whereby technological advancements resulted in brutal conditions. If you are not sure that you agree, check into Chernobyl or Hiroshima- the tragedies that occurred in these cities are two of the more obvious incidents I could point toward to reinforce the point.

Don't get the wrong idea- I am no "Luddite", though I do sometimes lean that way. (By the way... the Luddites were English textile artisans of the Nineteenth Century who smashed automated machines that threatened their jobs. They believed that the Industrial Revolution would negatively affect their standard of living.) Somewhere in the archives you could locate a blog post that describes all the modern wonders that I would not like to live without. In fact the majority of time I feel lucky to have been born into this age. One obvious benefit has been the Internet. I believe that this innovation has almost unlimited capacity to improve the lives of human beings. The ways it has increased our opportunities for communication and education are amazing. It's the type of tool with such a pervasive presence in my life that I wonder how I ever got by without it. If I woke up tomorrow and it was gone forever, I would certainly mourn the loss.

Yet there are negative consequences of our technological reach. I've written extensively (and recently) about my concerns over fossil fuel consumption. I'll spare you the rehash so soon. I bring it up merely to demonstrate my fundamental ambivalence. Unfortunately people have such great faith in the power of technology that they take for granted that any harm it causes can be ameliorated by future advancements. I don't think that is necessarily so. We have transformed areas of the Earth into uninhabitable spaces that won't repair themselves for hundreds (if not thousands) of years. We have such unmitigated hubris that we honestly believe our potential is limitless. But there are a few basic realities that we ignore when we think in those terms.

One of the great hopes of mankind has been the possibility of defeating death. Ever since Juan Ponce de Leon, we have been searching for the "Fountain of Youth". The individual resistance to dying is one of the most intrinsic drives we can experience as men. Until the last several decades, this dream was strictly the province of fantasy. Since ancient times societies have accepted that life is only for the Gods to give and/or take away. Now that resignation has started to slip away. With the rapid progress in genetic research, we are starting to think about the feasibility of immortality. Could we indeed live forever? In 1920, J.F. Rutherford (a prominent Jehovah's Witness) wrote a book called Millions Now Living Will Never Die. Upon the book's publication, many thought the author was a "kook". I wonder if so many would be quick to condemn the assertion today.

Perhaps the essential question is not whether or not immortality is attainable within our lifetimes- but whether it is desirable. Human beings have consistently shown that our scientific progress out-paces our philosophical, ethical, and spiritual development. Likewise technological advancements have benefited some more than others. Do you believe that, if scientists learn how to keep people alive forever, that the opportunity will be extended to all in a democratic way? Or will it be the privilege of the wealthy? How will society justify withholding it from the disenfranchised? And what kinds of resentment, conflict and strife will such inequities bring?

Do you think that you would be able to age gracefully while your "leaders" and the upper classes flaunt their perpetual youth? On the other hand, is the best in health care an essential human right? How would the problems of overpopulation and resource management be confounded if the possibility of immortality was extended to everybody on earth? These are not easy questions, but I believe them to be necessary.

Fully Damned Digital.

After years and years of surfing the net with a 56.6 speed modem (using dial-up service), my household has finally converted to DSL technology. It's no longer necessary for us to accelerate our transmission by disabling high resolution images. While our former way of computing taught us the virtue of patience, I have to say that I will be getting used to this new speed very quickly. Actually, we did have a test trial with DSL when it first became available in the last neighborhood we lived in. This was over four years ago. For a glorious two weeks we rode the cables at high velocity. Within that time I (gulp) downloaded an entire library of new and interesting songs from bands I was hardly familiar with. Those were the days of Napster (cue the old-timey phonographic background music here). Since then I've learned to put my computer to better (and less extralegal) purposes. But we were both astonished by how much more fun the Internet was with DSL.

Unfortunately for us that house soon proceeded to reject DSL service like a sturdy immune system rejects an alien heart. For some reason we couldn't get a consistent connection, and that led to so much frustration that we just gave up. Believe me, it was hard to regress to dial-up. In the ensuing years we've become like dinosuars, plodding our way through cyberspace on cumbersome and atavistic legs. My friends would send me links for streaming audio and then laugh at me when I told them why they need not bother. I had access to faster service at work, but the overzealous filters blocked out a lot of the more interesting material. But now it's "back to the future" again.

We are "cooking with gas" now. A whole entire world has unveiled itself to my prying eyes. And no... I'm not talking about the unsavory stuff you might be suspecting. Keep your mind out of the gutter, friend. No, I'm actually referring to YouTube. I now have virtually instant access to unlimited entertainment. I can see my favorite bands performing on homemade music videos. Whether I'm in the mood to watch the Dancing Outlaw cut the rug or David Cross berate a heckler, I can search for the footage and inevitably I'll find it. Yesterday I decided I wanted to watch an old school breakdancing battle, and within seconds I had multiple options to choose from. But that's not all... in fact, you'd be amazed what those Asian kids are doing nowadays.

And what makes this all possible? How did we get here from those 1980's-era modems that took minutes just to deliver a line of text? It all comes from a 1948 scientific paper by Claude Shannon, which outlined the theory of digital communication. But it wasn't until 1988 that Joe Lechleider of Bellcore decided that wideband digital signals could be carried over conventional twisted pair phone lines. They would simply utilize the bandwidth that already existed above the range of analog voice signals (if you want a more technical explanation- have at it). Thus DSL (the digital subscriber loop) was born. It's just one more incredible tool to make us grateful that we are living in the time we are in. Like it or not, we have landed ourselves smack down in the Information Age.

Of course wireless technology will most likely make DSL obsolete one day. But in this case my usual resistance to being an early adopter won't make me suffer too much. I can't yet imagine what further capabilities I'll need. The Law of Diminishing Returns suggests that I'll be able to do without for awhile.

Grapplling with new equipment.

I've finally given in and purchased a new camera. I put it off a long time, as if I were standing on a high dive and considering whether or not I really wanted to take the jump. I had the money for a decent consumer digital SLR, and I bought one. It's a Canon EOS Rebel XTi. When I walked into Ritz Camera I merely intended to buy a back-up lithium battery for my Canon G6. On an impulse I decided to make the upgrade. By the time I got out of the store I had spent more than twice what it cost for the body of the camera alone. The extended warranty was over $300 for three years. I bought a zoom lens, a backup battery, a tripod, a backpack, a micro lens set, and UV protector caps. I even splurged and bought a $20 "Magic Lantern" DVD for instructional purposes. By the time I decided to purchase that, I figured it was a minimal extra expense.

I should be excited with all this new gear. But the truth of the matter is that I find it a bit oppressive. All of that stuff is staring at me in the face like some kind of mute challenge. I really have no idea how to get the kind of results I want out of it. The G6 I've been shooting with for over three years is a kind of "bridge" digital camera. It's more complex than a point-and-shoot model that you stick in your pocket. It's got all kinds of manual settings that let you do more creative work. The sensors on the processing chip are smaller, and so even though it may produce images with a high amount of megapixels- the quality of those images will not be as pristine as a digital SLR with the same amount of (or even less) megapixels. You are also limited to a few lenses specifically made for the Powershot series. But unlike a digital SLR, you can use the LCD screen to shoot. I've gotten quite used to composing my shots with that tool.

For me it's all about process. I know that G6 so well that I barely have to think to get the shots I want. It's grown on me like another appendage. I've never had to worry about carrying around separate lenses. It's just grab-and-go. I'm worried that I will lose an element of spontaneity with this new equipment. It seems like such a production. I certainly don't want to go out and buy some special vest to carry around the covers and all the other crap that comes with it. I also know exactly what I can do with the G6 under just about any specific conditions. Now I have to stop and think again, just like a novice.

There's a good chance that having to undergo another phase of technical education will make me a better photographer. Once I begin to assimilate the capabilities of this new camera, I will probably have a hard time going back to the G6. And I know that it will be there if I need it. I'm not giving it away. The reality is that the Rebel XTi produces markedly better images. Now I have to build up my confidence with it. Using it has to become second nature. Only when I can intuitively perform with the camera in my hands will I be able to channel my creativity directly again. That's going to take some time, but it should be well worth the effort. Bring on the new era (I guess).

My fascination with our "throwaway" culture.

I assume that just about everyone I know has heard of the Confucian curse- "May you live in interesting times." Regardless, I believe that this wish has been fulfilled. We contend with global warming, a looming oil crisis, bad government, a general rise in fundamentalism, nuclear proliferation, economic globalization, etc. There are certainly plenty of bleak indicators to worry us. Writing about these challenges could keep me busy for the rest of my natural life. Fortunately there is at least one offsetting benefit that our contemporary life offers us- something that can help distract us from the malaise of our modern times. We have an unprecedented access to just about anything ever recorded. This includes music, film, news, television, internet sites, literature, and art. In a very short period of time, we can locate the particular piece of media that we desire. Modes of communication have multiplied and accelerated.

I think that this only truly hit me when I discovered Amazon.com. Never before had it been so easy to locate and/or discover any of the endless creations of man- whether the work in question was primarily characterized as information, education or entertainment. It was an astounding expansion of availability to the minds of our contemporaries, as well as those in our recent past. Many people alive today have never known a time before CDs, videos, PC's, DVD's and the multitude of other recording devices. They can't remember a time of limited choice. Although I am by no means an old man, there was a time in my youth when people relied on the rather limited and arbitrary collections of local libraries. That's not necessary today. I also remember television before the spread of cable. Home viewers had to settle for whatever was being offered on network television. That sounds incredibly quaint now that we have ON Demand.

Nowadays the only restrictions we face are imposed by our own financial resources. We choose from the vast number of media platforms based upon what we can afford. I don't have any fancy cable. I have a dial-up internet connection. But I can still get the items I want delivered to my home within a reasonable period of time, and I own the devices necessary to enjoy them. That's a far cry from 200 years ago. Back then wars were needlessly extended due to the slow pace of communication. People actually relied on horses to deliver the mail. On the other hand, we can conceivably learn what happens in any part of the world in as short of a period as it takes to transmit digital data via satellite. We are still adjusting to the ramifications of this Information Age. It's easy to feel overwhelmed.

But there's a more relaxed, almost atavistic way to deal with all of this. For as long as there has been a settled human population, people have used the marketplace for the exchange of ideas, as well as other types of consumables. And here I'm talking about the most organic and loosely organized marketplace- the "swap meet" or peddler's fare. At these gatherings, ordinary f0lks gather to participate in the immediate and most localized of economies. They are not restricted by the conventions of corporate sales. Here we can discover the cast-off detritus of media platforms that are no longer in fashion. The progress of technology is so swift that the recordings of yesterday's formats (8-track and cassette tapes, VHS, vinyl records, laserdiscs) can be had for almost nothing. What better and more economical way is there to take stock of where we've been?

While it's true that the elements of local taste and a dose of random chance define the available selection at such markets, the experience of shopping in such places can be akin to a treasure hunt. If you can transcend the strange sort of technological bias we have become accustomed to (arising from new gadgets that make us turn our nose up at the grainy quality of analog recordings), you can discover gems that you were never even aware of. If you can open yourself to the serendipity of "fate", and engage this most disorganized of marketplace- you can avoid the varying degrees of marketing manipulation that define our throwaway corporate culture. It's a fascinating exploration that rewards the seeker with a unique sociological perspective and a wealth of insights about our postmodern age. And it might even put that old Confucian curse in a new light.