Coming out of doing video games myself many years ago it sure is interesting hearing about the challenges and obstacles that people face even just bringing technology to the table in other industries.
For all of the short-comings of the video games industry such as its secrecy, repetition and unreasonable schedules, other issues such as getting access to new technology and a general shared appreciation for getting things out the door were not barriers. I don't think we respected, feared or even valued machines quite so much; we mostly just chewed through them on the quest to deliver product... every game development lab was littered with last years machines piled up in corners. In a virtual sense the same thing was true with last years USENIX proceedings, or Santa Fe ALife Proceedings or Siggraph Proceedings... This must be increasingly true for many independent developers today; given how easy it is to do work these days. It is easier now to turn an idea into a product than ever before. Every day or two a new project seems to come along - hacked together by some ad-hoc team formed just for the moment around the idea. The tools and technology are so good and there is so much support in the open source communities for new ideas. I can see why NSF grants / contests / etc could select for mediocrity - even in the realm of dedicated computing professionals from academic, industry and non profit backgrounds. Perhaps actual success with real world audiences is the best judge; and rather than putting oneself under the strictures of limited powers it is best to just avoid the whole theater and do work in the open... - anselm On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 11:52 AM, Eric Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Exactly. > > It's been an interesting journey for me - coming from a hard-core software > development mindset and delving into the deepest levels of cartographic and > GIScience research in academia. I spend alot of time just scratching my head > over how things are done. > > A major source of the head-scratching is because cartography and GIScience > (and thus GeoViz) typically come out of Geography. Departments of Geography > typically fall within Schools of Arts and Science and sometimes even within > a School of Social Science. > > Within a typical university, the School of Engineering will maintain their > own IT support staff. The rest of the university is "ruled" by a more > general IT support staff. The more general IT support tends to have stricter > rules about what you can do with a computer. It makes a certain amount of > sense -and if you've ever had to do tech support, it's pretty clear. > > -Eric > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 12:38 PM, R E Sieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Tell me about it. I'm currently developing a cyberinfrastructure for the >> humanities. No disrespect to the humanities but they don't know about >> computers. And it is a constant battle to get access. >> >> Renee >> >> Eric Wolf wrote: >> > You miss my point - it's not that the NSF reviewers lack appropriate >> > rights - it's that researchers outside of schools of engineering and >> > departments of computer science frequently fight battles with IT >> > security that can cause things not to work smoothly. I've experienced >> > it many times. >> > >> > I know it's hard to believe. I'm constantly dumb-founded by the inane >> > hurdles I have to go through in order to just do my work. I spent over >> > a decade in the private sector developing software. This is the kind >> > of problem that usually resolved in seconds outside of academia. >> > However, inside academia it's a constant battle. And just when you >> > thought you had everything working, someone changes policies and your >> > demo doesn't work. >> > >> > But as I think more about it, the real reason the NSF is asking for >> > stand-alone HTML is to provide a blind review process. >> > >> > -Eric >> > >> > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Randy George <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Eric, >> > >> > >> > >> > But… isn't that a compelling reason to just provide a link? >> > >> > >> > >> > The review committee only needs a highspeed link, a computer with >> > a sufficiently modern GPU, and a decent projector. All the >> > installation is out of their hands. The link points at an SGI or >> > Deep Blue or whatever AWS Hadoop, Beowulf cluster … needed at the >> > other end, no admin rights required. >> > >> > >> > >> > randy >> > >> > >> > >> > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] *On Behalf Of *Eric >> Wolf >> > *Sent:* Friday, June 13, 2008 11:00 AM >> > >> > *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > *Subject:* Re: [Geowanking] National Science Foundation >> > Visualization Challenge >> > >> > >> > >> > One of the reasons for the limitations is to ensure that the >> > content can be judged - but not because NSF lacks the facilities. >> > If you've ever tried to say, get a development server set up in an >> > academic environment outside of an engineering school or CompSci >> > department, you'd know the challenges. >> > >> > I'm currently dealing with this problem in my work. I'm supposed >> > to be exploring ways to contribute to OGC specs on behalf of The >> > National Map. To do this, I want to make code changes to servers >> > and clients that implement OGC - like GeoServer and OpenLayers. >> > But I'm not allowed to have admin or root access on my workstation. >> > >> > Another possible reason is that NSF usually tries to use a blind >> > review process. If they have to point a browser to your website, >> > they know who created it. >> > >> > -Eric Wolf >> > >> > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Randy George >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Renee, >> > >> > Curious, I took a look at the NSF link. I would have guessed >> > "interactive >> > graphics" would fit geowanking more than "info graphics." I think >> > you are >> > right, though, about the winning entries. I wonder if it has >> > something to do >> > with NSF's limitations. >> > >> > For example here is the acceptable formats list for media: >> > "Interactive and Non-interactive Media: >> > Preferred animation formats: NTSC Beta SP, DVC Pro. >> > Digital formats such as QuickTime, Flash, AVI or MPEG are >> > acceptable. >> > Digital files should be copied to CD-ROM(s) or DVD." >> > >> > Or this: >> > "Q: May we use an online URL as an entry? >> > A: No. We can't rely on Internet connections during the >> > review/judging process. Save the relevant html and any associated >> > media >> > locally and then burn it to a CD-ROM or DVD." >> > >> > Hmm ... Is this "Visualization Challenge" or challenged >> > visualization? I >> > thought interactive media would include internet, browser, portal, >> > online >> > communities, virtual 3D worlds, OGC WPS pipes etc. I somehow doubt >> > it can >> > fit on a cd-rom or dvd. What is HTML without httpd? Perhaps NSF >> > could rent a >> > more up-to-date venue for their review process with a reliable >> > highspeed >> > connection. >> > >> > The judges appear stuck in an earlier media generation. Perhaps a >> > case of >> > Kuhn meets McLuhan? If NSF wants to stimulate innovation they should >> > consider moving 'media' ahead a decade or two. >> > >> > randy >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] On Behalf Of R E Sieber >> > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:32 PM >> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > Subject: [Geowanking] National Science Foundation Visualization >> > Challenge >> > >> > This may be of interest to some. >> > >> > Science and engineering visualization challenge (National Science >> > Foundation) >> > >> http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/scivis/index.jsp?id=challenge >> > >> > Frankly, I find their winning entries uninspiring in terms of new >> > technologies (e..g, look at their FAQs, which are incredibly >> snarky). >> > However, winning in one of these categories -- I'm guessing the info >> > graphics one would be right for geowankers -- would look very good >> on >> > one's resume. >> > >> > BTW, it is open to international entries. >> > >> > Renee >> > >> > Some of science's most powerful statements are not made in words. >> From >> > the diagrams of DaVinci to Hooke's microscopic bestiary, the beaks >> of >> > Darwin's finches, Rosalind Franklin's x-rays or the latest >> > photographic >> > marvels retrieved from the remotest galactic outback, visualization >> of >> > research has a long and literally illustrious history. To >> > illustrate is, >> > etymologically and actually, to enlighten. >> > >> > You can do science without graphics. But it's very difficult to >> > communicate it in the absence of pictures. Indeed, some insights can >> > only be made widely comprehensible as images. How many people >> > would have >> > heard of fractal geometry or the double helix or solar flares or >> > synaptic morphology or the cosmic microwave background, if they >> > had been >> > described solely in words? >> > >> > To the general public, whose support sustains the global research >> > enterprise, these and scores of other indispensable concepts exist >> > chiefly as images. They become part of the essential iconic >> > lexicon. And >> > they serve as a source of excitement and motivation for the next >> > generation of researchers. >> > >> > The National Science Foundation (NSF) and Science created the >> Science >> > and Engineering Visualization Challenge to celebrate that grand >> > tradition-and to encourage its continued growth. In a world where >> > science literacy is dismayingly rare, illustrations provide the most >> > immediate and influential connection between scientists and other >> > citizens, and the best hope for nurturing popular interest. >> > Indeed, they >> > are now a necessity for public understanding of research >> developments: >> > In an increasingly graphics-oriented culture, where people acquire >> the >> > majority of their news from TV and the World Wide Web, a story >> > without a >> > vivid and intriguing image is often no story at all. >> > >> > We urge you and your colleagues to contribute to the next >> competition >> > and to join us in congratulating the winners. >> > >> > Judges appointed by the National Science Foundation and the journal >> > Science will select winners in each of five categories: photographs, >> > illustrations, informational graphics, interactive media and >> > non-interactive media. The winners will be published in a special >> > section of the Sept. 26, 2008 issue of the journal Science and >> Science >> > Online and on the NSF Web site. One of the winning entries will be >> on >> > the front cover of Science. In addition, each finalist will receive >> a >> > free, one-year print and on-line subscription to the journal >> > Science and >> > a certificate of appreciation. >> > >> > Entries for 2008 are being solicited now. We urge all researchers >> and >> > science communicators to participate in this unique and inspiring >> > competition. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Geowanking mailing list >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Geowanking mailing list >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > -=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=- >> > Eric B. Wolf 720-209-6818 >> > PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Geowanking mailing list >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > -=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=- >> > Eric B. Wolf 720-209-6818 >> > PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Geowanking mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Geowanking mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking >> > > > > -- > -=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=- > Eric B. Wolf 720-209-6818 > PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography > > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking > -- anselm 415 215 4856 http://hook.org http://makerlab.com
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
