> I don't know what you mean by "hack value". >From the Jargon File: "Hack value: Often adduced as the reason or motivation for expending effort toward a *seemingly* useless goal, the point being that the accomplished goal is a hack. For example, MacLISP had features for reading and printing Roman numerals, which were installed purely for hack value. See display hack for one method of computing hack value, but this cannot really be explained, only experienced. As Louis Armstrong once said when asked to explain jazz: “Man, if you gotta ask you'll never know.” (Feminists please note Fats Waller's explanation of rhythm: “Lady, if you got to ask, you ain't got it.”)" http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/H/hack-value.html stars around "seemingly" are mine. i wanted to emphasize that wearables, currently, don't make sence to me. It will make sence to me when I see spectacles which will have engraved circuits on them, and the glasses will be able to project an image on the lences, without the need for a projector, or at least one anybody will notice. then, it might be useful. >Ignore the current crude manifestation of wearables. Ok, i'm game. >Think of the end goal: you are an inefficient meatbag with lousy memory, >limited senses, limited processing ability, and can only communicate with other >people within shouting distance. Or in the case of Pointy-Hair Bosses, you can only communicate by shouting! :) [snip snip] > Now imagine that you can augment your memory, improve your senses, speed up [snip snip] > can zoom in on a virtual view of it and read about it on the 'net. So, basically, what you're telling me that the idea is to be like Lt. Major Motoko Kusonagi or Ishikawa-san from [[Ghost in the Shell]]. [[Ghost in the Shell]] ::= http://en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Ghost_in_the_Shell > Cell phones and PDAs and digital cameras and laptops are all clunky discrete > devices that you pick up, carry, and decide to use. Wearables are basically a > baby-step in the direction of transparent, ubiquitous computing, where > everything is always "on". So, here's my next question: (I'm playing devil's advocate, here) What's the intrinsic value of ubiquitous computing? What good will it do to society? Or, better put and in order to show the selfish reason behind my question, what will it do for me? And if everything is on all the time, will I be able to get up, plug out and cop out? (To paraphrase a popular late 60's saying). Will I be able to live in a society that has adopted ubiquitous computing, without having to use computers? Will I be depended on my Navi (Serial Experiment: Lain reference) to perform even the most simple of tasks? What will happen when <insert your favorite monopoly here> enters the business and wants to make everything "interoperable"? What will happen if Trusted Computing does get accepted as the norm? Well besides busting out the soldering gun, the EEPROM writer and the logic probe ... damn, I must be getting old, I'm talking about ethics... George Marselis > -Roger _______________________________________________ Wear-Hard mailing listhttp://www.haven.org/mailman/listinfo/wear-hard
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail