After a little bit of a snafu over an image I appropriated for what was more or less a free-associative rant about “spooky action at a distance”, author Adam Greenfield (”head of design direction for service and user-interface design at Nokia“), who wrote the book “Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing” left a comment which clarifies his position on such paranormal topics as “scrying” and “remote viewing”, which he says have no place in his technological vision. For the purposes of keeping the record straight and not putting words into his mouth, I’m reproducing his comment here as its own post:
What do I repudiate? Let’s see. “Scrying.†“Remote viewing.†Anything at all described as being “paranormal†or “extrasensory.â€
If your argument is that the technology now exists, at least in principle, to support certain “sufficiently advanced†experiences previous generations would have had trouble distinguishing from the ostensibly paranormal, I can’t necessarily disagree with that.
If, on the other hand, your argument is in any way that scrying and remote viewing are real phenomena or are otherwise worthy of a moment’s consideration, I’d want to make it very clear to anyone coming across this page that this has nothing to do with the things I write and speak about, and that your use of that image in no way implies my advocacy of such a belief.
I’m sorry if this sounds humorless or pompous, but I can’t stress enough just how destructive I find these ideas, and how distressed I’d be if anyone thought of me as an advocate of them.
So, to reiterate, Adam Greenfield, not into the paranormal. Me, on the other hand, that’s my bread and butter - having come up in this world as an “occult investigator” and all. Just a matter of backgrounds I guess, but I’m still really excited about the notion of everyware, and the potential for creating a fully animist, spiritual and even paranormal system of harmonious coexistence between all species, known and unknown, and all technologies, developed and unexplored. Thanks very much for stopping by Adam, and I appreciate your contributions to this discussion!
- END -
ASSOCIATED CONTENT @TMBCHR (Auto-Generated)
- Homegrown Homebrew Comm Technology: Wave of the Future
- Cultivating Information Gardens On Your Desktop
- The Importance of Surveillance In Ubiquitous Computing
- Vaporware, Everyware, Thinware, Mandala OS, @OmnivateLLC & The Future of Post-Corporate Business Organization
- Here, There And Everyware…
31 Comments
Astonishing to think about the wasted effort of Earth’s many Adam Greenfields in the next decade. Do people still think that mere proximity is memetically dangerous or contagious? Do I really need to visit every site that quotes me and clarify the fact I don’t necessarily agree with the content on their blog? Are we grownups or what?
Bonus LULZ: The way he reacted, you’d think he got quoted on Stormfront or something.
Open memo to all living and dead authors: all of your work is fair game. Yeah, sorry.
Destructive ideas?
Destructive to what? There’s a huge, multi-cultural wealth of human ideas and imagination here — occult or not, this is a goldmine of material for future telecommunications technology design.
People should grow phones in their backyard and hatch them by the kitchen sink. Airwave, patent and bandwidth monopolies all depend on unsustainable, resource-intensive infrastructure and the homegrown solutions will be cheaper and more powerful than anything Chinese workers can assemble for Western consumers.
I appreciate what you’re doing to raise RFID awareness and generate discussion. That’s probably the best thing that could come out of this — more awareness.
#codechant
This may be a bit of a reach, but…
http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/05/04/jung-on-signs-symbols/
I’m over at your research site and I’m confused, is Adam Greenfield Speedbird? Whoever is in that picture is a cutie pie. Vroom, vroom.
http://speedbird.wordpress.com/about/
Yeah, for the record I don’t believe in magic, remote viewing, etc anymore either. Although I wish you the best of luck with… whatever it is you’re doing… I think the occult angle may be a good way to keep it vaporware instead of #whatworks.
But the Discrodian in me can’t resist pointing out this little detail about Adam: he used to be a PSYOP sergeant in the Army. http://www.well.com/conf/inkwell.vue/t...Adam-Greenfield-Everyware-page01.html
CONSPIRACY?
(Sorry Adam, I couldn’t resist)
This is pretty common. These arguments. lots of people get all excited about what they percieve to be the implications of quantum physics and the connection they see with it to hinu mysticism and the Kaballah etc.
Then there are lots of people still totally materialistic, that are right in the thick of string theory and whatever..
There was even a real hard nosed guy on “what the bleep do we know” It was a good contrast.
But what it bolis down to is a really niave view of the world, IMO.
That they still hold out for this idea of a clock work universe that just goes according to pre-ordained plan once you wind it up, and with no room for free will.
I don’t think its the Speedbird that comments here and on my old blog and Ian’s blog.
I think the way to be smart about the connection between the occult and technology is a hard razors edge to walk though.
To be rigororous enough to be respected by scientists is hard. I end up getting a little bored reading the ones that are responsible and rigorous, because they end up painstakingly making a case for some thing thats ends up more or less like preaching to the choir.
But anyway one possible school of thought is that everything really is mechanical including all the psychic stuff.
Physical explanations for all of it.
That aregument doesn’t bug me. Its the burying of the head in the sand that bugs me. Things they pretend aren’t there hoping they go away.
But go to any bar and star at the back of a girls head untill she turns around and notices you…anyone can do it and its psychic.
Maybe engineers really can’t do it…dunno.
Justin, you can quit talking about me like I’m not right here. Or is that a lesson that you have yet to learn from the Web?
Klint alludes to pragmatism, and my treating sites and discussions like this as anathema stems from a simple and highly pragmatic realization: being seen as someone who takes this stuff at all seriously is death to your credibility among anyone who does not already Want To Believe. I got out in the world some, and realized most ricky-tick that citing TOPY or Rupert Sheldrake or Timewave Zero or Robert Anton WIlson does not exactly earn you the respect or sustained attention of rigorous thinkers.
So you’re damn right I don’t want people thinking of my work as paranormal, even by happenstance, even by the flimsiest tissue of proximity.
Ted, I don’t think your strawman distinction between “totally materialistic” thought (which you characterize as sterile and reductionist) and more enlightened awareness is going to hold up. It’s unsophisticated, old-fashioned, predicated on (at best) a profound misunderstanding of the science you mention. I, at least, don’t see the need for anything other than emergence in the large-scale interaction of relatively simple systems to generate all the mystery, wonder and beauty of the universe.
To me, looking for a mechanism outside that is the real reductionism, and the real breach of faith with possibility. It’s like my beef with Christians whose god is so puny s/he can’t possibly have devised a mechanism like evolution to account for the complexity of the human eye: your “paranormal,” your “spooky action at a distance,” and yes, even your magick are so much shallower and shabbier than simply coming to terms with the Big Is.
And thanks, Julia. : . )
And finally, because I couldn’t resist:
But go to any bar and star at the back of a girls head untill she turns around and notices you…anyone can do it and its psychic.
Or you could, y’know, just go up and talk to her, like a normal human being. I dunno - works for me.
I think its more like nested hierarchies. So your argumant is a straw man. There doesn’t have to be anything “outside” There are just, basically differences in scale.
I think it will turn out that our brains are quantum computers. So thought is “nonlocal” and basically doesn’t have to follow physics on a macro scale.
Just because this line or inquiry starts to sound “woo woo” is no reason to bury ones head in tha sand.
Maybe “paranormal” is the wrong word. Because to me a lot of this woo woo stuff is a normal part of my everyday life and its the same for everyone else even if their cognitive dissonance can bring them to admit it.
So take a look at this pie chart:
http://hetdex.org/images/dark_energy/universe_made_of.jpg (thanks Tim)
Is the bulk of the pie “outside” the system? I would say ‘no.’ But if someone were to say “yes.” I could see their point too.
If someone were to say “I only want to concern myself with the narrow band of “normal matter” then thats fine also unless they add:
“..and anyone who wants to concern themselves with the rest of the pie is a whack job!” Then I would have a problem with them.
But anyway you “slice it” the bulk of the Universe is made up of energy and thats what the occult line of inquiry concerns itself with.
I very much get what you’re saying Adam and respect your position vis-a-vis the “professional world.” Maintaining a particular perception in the eyes of others is a challenging line to walk - much moreso than any paranormal/materialist argument… Personally, I’m all about the “funhouse” approach, throw it all in the mix and see what sticks. The paranormal is a major component of the genre I write in, so its a natural fit for me to explore it with this in mind. Drawing people who have an interest into the paranormal and getting them excited about future technologies doesn’t seem like a pointless venture to me as a web writer.
In any event, just for the record, you are or aren’t the same Speedbird who left really insightful and valuable comments on this site, like this one, over the years? I believe that person’s first name (or alias) was Adam as well, and may be in the UK.
People say vaporware like its a bad thing!
Adam, is the military playing catchup or trail-blazing in the keyword management department?
I would muse about you in the third person anytime, man. It would be fun to touch base like humans at some point and we probably willl.
I just find it remarkable that such a small variation of your goateed likeness set off any alarm bells. So much imagery is cycled through here in the space of a week, I doubt any potential employers would balk at…well, perhaps I’m not giving your employers enough credit for paranoia and due diligence.
I’m curious now that I reflect on it — what actually brought you here? I don’t remember any specific mention of your name and I don’t see how a .jpg scan of magazine page would set off google alerts. Are you a regular reader?
For what it’s worth, I do not believe the two speedbirds are the same. Doesn’t ring true to me, given his comments over on my site.
Probably just a weird coincidence…
woowoo….
I was thinking the same thing. I thought for a second possibly that the “speedbird” We all love was an online persona of AG, and one that AG never intended to become connected with his professional life.
But then I was thinking that usually peoples alternate personas are more brash, outspoken and flamboyant than they are in real life not the reverse.
I mean “original speedbird” is a very thoughtful humble dude. Powerful, yet understated.
Wouldn’t it be funny though if say Richard Dawkins, made up a humble thoughtful persona, and came to, like Intelligent design message boards or something and offered thought provoking little insights, in a freindly non confrontational way?
Just stumbled across:
“An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all.” ~ Oscar Wilde
Adam’s been around the block a few more times than I have, so he may have better insight into this than me, but it doesn’t seem to me that a belief or interest in the occult and the paranormal is particularly damaging to one’s reputation. Most people believe in “the paranormal” writ large (ghosts, UFOs, etc), and people seem to be drawn to “eccentrics.” So I wouldn’t worry too much about not being taken seriously (though obviously it depends on who you want to be taken seriously by).
But if you’re interested in getting things done (other than making money from the gullible), ESP, magic, etc. is a black hole. The ganzfeld experiments are very interesting. And who am I to say that they won’t yield verifiable results eventually? But a 38% or so success rate at being able get a few sketchy details of a picture or whatever isn’t particularly useful. So perhaps this research could eventually lead to something more useful eventually, but the application isn’t there yet.
So I don’t know what the hell you guys are even trying to do - other than string words together a la Kenji Siratori or Francis E. Dec (which is fine if that’s what you’re going for), so I can’t really say that the occult isn’t what you should be studying to make the thing work. But I have a hunch there are probably more direct paths to accomplishing whatever it is you’re trying to do.
Although I haven’t read his comments on either Ian’s or Ted’s sites I wouldn’t be so sure the two speedbird’s aren’t the same guy. Some people are better than others at compartmentalizing their thoughts, ideas and statements.
At Justin - maybe he was scrying!
@justin
http://www.timboucher.com/journal/wp-c...loads/2009/01/adam-greenfield-mit.jpg
Google Alerts does actually scan keywords in images. It’s not always on time though, you may get it days later
Mr. Greenfield (AG) is not me…
Hey the *real* speedbird, thanks for stopping by and clarifying! How you been?
I’m trying to create an imaginal space for thinking up new technology that’s rooted in the biosphere — cellular growth instead of manufacturing — and then working backwards to translate weirdo visions into real-world details. That’s my Omnivate LLC in a nut-shell.
That, and have fun.
Been around, over at Ian’s place mostly (who pointed me back in the direction of this thread).
Human wisdom systems in action!
2 Trackbacks
[...] Courtesy pizzaSEO, in response to Adam: There’s a huge, multi-cultural wealth of human ideas and imagination here — occult or not, this is a goldmine of material for future telecommunications technology design. [...]
[...] all the excitement online lately about the emergence of future technologies like ambient intelligence, ubiquitous computing and “everyware” into the consumer [...]