Technology and the real world

I just returned from a trip to Florida with Byron (my 20-year old son.) While there, we had to take the obligatory pilgrimage to Walt Disney World. We chose Epcot as our destination for the day.

I've always been fascinated by Walt Disney's original vision for Epcot. The name is actually an acronym for Experimental Prototype City Of Tomorrow. Walt Disney originally envisioned this as a working city, demonstrating the use of technology to create a better life. At the same time, the site was to be a "laboratory" to test new concepts in a real-world situation. I still feel that there is a need for such a "proving ground."

In the real world however, Epcot is a theme park. The first week of January is a great time to go. In spite of the cold snap that Florida (and the rest of the country) is currently suffering through, the weather was clear, with just a light jacket required. The crowds were non-existent. Our longest wait for any ride was less than 20 minutes and most we just walked right up.

That's not to say that everything went smoothly on our trip however! We entered the Orlando area on Route 50, coming from Brooksville. Instead of planning ahead, I decided to utilize the GPS on my new Motorola Droid. The GPS generally works very well, and having it built into the phone is great, but you have to know the "right question" to get the right answer.

When we got fairly close (just past the Florida Turnpike), I asked for directions to "Walt Disney World." We were pretty close! Just 13 miles. Turn right at the next intersection...

We drove through a variety of back roads, past nice housing developments (including "Wintermere" - close, but not quite...) and a bit of open space. All of the roads were two lane, and there was NO traffic, which seemed strange. There were also none of the signs that always tout the new attractions at the parks.

Suddenly, we were "there". But instead of the cheerful "Welcome to Disney World", the signs all said "Cast Members only." We were indeed at Disney World, but we were at the warehouses where the floats live! A monorail maintenance facility was nearby. It was fascinating, but not at all where we intended to be.

I realized that I had not been specific enough. This time, I typed in "Epcot Center". More two lane roads followed. Most of the traffic consisted of buses with big mouse ears. Again, the directions indicated that we should take a right in a 10th of a mile. But that road said "buses only", and it lead directly to the the iconic geodesic dome! We were basically right at the front door!

We took the only route that we could. The parking lot was right next to us, but there were traffic barriers in the way. After a mile or so, we could actually see the booths where the parking fees are collected, but we were on the wrong side of them (and confronted by another "Do Not Enter" sign.)

We continued to follow the road for quite a while, passing golf course, camping and resort entries, until we got to the large four-lane highway that I was expecting. Just five more miles and we were at the parking entry that we had seen 15 minutes earlier.

I enjoy "serendipitous moments" like this, and Byron and I had a good laugh over our "adventure". On the other hand, it's a good thing that we were weren't driving an ambulance to a person in need.

As we continue to rely more on technology, it is important for us to understand the resource and to a certain extent, for it to understand our needs. I'm not sure how to prevent this kind of situation, but making technology's interaction with people more intuitive will be a major step toward the future that we all desire.

Shaking lose from the bonds of history

Starting today, if you could design a better society, how would you start? Many of the characteristics of our current model are based on horse and buggy concepts. First the Industrial Revolution and then the modern Information Age have changed everything. Not all of those changes are good. None of them are planned. Instead, because something was possible, it was done. At the same time, new technologies offer amazing potential benefits. Realistically, if advances had not been made in agriculture and food distribution, starvation would be rampant to an even greater degree than it is. The Malthusian limits to growth have been expanded, but there is still a limit. We are poisoning our skies and water, squandering our limited natural resources and standing idly by as millions starve, or are murdered or victimized by brutal governments.

First, it is important to realize that Utopia (literally "nowhere") is not the goal. Perfect societies are often predicated on perfect people but like Utopias, those people are scarce. Instead, there must be laws and a system of checks and balances. Those are some of the features that have made the United States as resilient as it has been. While there may still be some debate as to whether the United States' model is the best available, few would argue that it is perfect. There are many other examples of social systems that have worked well, or not so well. Socialism and central planning failed in the Soviet Union. Monarchies, dictatorships and theocracies have perpetrated horrendous acts on their citizens (and neighbors.) Democracies have also trampled on the rights of minorities and unchecked capitalism has created huge inequities between the "haves" and the "have-nots".

If we are to liberate ourselves from the mistakes of the past, we must start with a relatively clean slate. Reexamine each facet of modern life and design a system that takes advantage of new capabilities, recognizes the limitations of carrying capacity and provides opportunities for as many as possible. We must also always be mindful of the past, for both its successes and its failures.

So what are the areas to be considered? Here's a starting list (in no particular order). We will expand it as we go:

• Energy
• Privacy and security
• Governance
• Education
• Healthcare
• Money and Taxation
• Population, immigration and emigration
• Transpotation
• Public infrastructure
• Living standards and incentives
• Foreign Relations
• Natural resources and ownership
• Personal Liberties, Rights vs. Responsibilities

There are many subjects that fall into multiple categories. Many decisions will be interrelated. The plan is to create a series of forums to discuss these issues. Rather than a running battle of "Yes" and "No", once a series of alternatives are generated for each major question that is raised, separate forums will be created to discuss each one, probably by invitation only. This will allow a "coalition of the willing" to work together toward a goal.

The forums will be set up shortly. Each subject will be launched with a new post. While there may be suggestions and references in those posts, the intent is that the participants will drive the direction of the discussions. As such, it is important to have broad participation. Please sign up to follow the blog and pass the word along.

Changing the world, by "Right-sizing"

Who wouldn't want to change the world? We all know the problems: pollution, poverty, disease, war and more. We're confronted by them every day. For some of us, it is a constant barrage of "bad news". For many, these problems are not abstract, but a part of their everyday life.

The goal of this blog will be to explore some of these problems, look at what is being done about them and begin a new conversation on how to move forward to a new and brighter future. If you are looking for answers, good luck on your search. There are no answers here, at least not yet.

As a starting point, consider why these problems haven't already been solved. Conspiracy theories aside, there aren't large shadow organizations dedicated to the perpetuation of poverty or disease (war is subject to some debate...) Instead, these ills are side-effects of our lifestyles, cultures and institutions. So the answer is simple. Just change the underlying model that creates all of this misery.

When looked at on the grand scale, the problem seems insurmountable. How can we change the very fabric of society? Fortunately, there are many dedicated people that are tackling the issues. They make a difference in the ways that they can: working at a soup kitchen, providing free medical care or legal services, drinking filtered water from a reusable container, taking public transit. Others, with more means, are going after even bigger challenges: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, supplemented by incredible generosity from Warren Buffett, is working on AIDS and other endemic problems. The Tiger Woods Foundation and Oprah Winfrey have devoted fortunes to education and the welfare of children. All of these efforts are both laudable and important. They make the world a better place.

In our world of instant gratification, the question remains: "Are we there yet?" Of course, the answer is a resounding "No." In fact, it would not be difficult to find those who think that we are moving in the wrong direction. In spite of everyone's efforts, we are actually losing ground. The reason is that the foundation is working against success. Civilization has built up a huge amount of inertia, and changing it will not be easy. Many of the very institutions that we have formed to protect our interests (mostly governmental), have become calcified. Polarized viewpoints struggle with each other until the result is stalemate.

In the recent global financial meltdown, the concept has been floated that certain organizations are "Too Big to Fail". They are so critical to the infrastructure of society (at least the financial sector) that their collapse would have ripple effects that would magnify that failure. Perhaps it is time to invert that logic and look at structures that are "Too Big to Succeed". Currently, the United States government is attempting to address a host of issues that are monumental in their scope. Financial system reform, health care reform, taxation, foreign wars, energy policy and more are being tackled in the worst global financial situation in recent memory. Some have criticized the sweeping nature of suggested reforms, preferring smaller, incremental steps. It can also be argued that these reforms do not go far enough. The interconnected nature of our world makes changes to any one institution very difficult. When one change is made, it upsets the existing equilibrium of the whole and a host of unintended consequences follow.

As an initial point of discussion, consider the proposition that in order to create a stable solution, it will be necessary to change the entire structure at once. Such a global change is naturally impossible. Imagine simultaneously changing the legal, governmental, financial, transportation, healthcare and communications systems of the United States. In order to avoid fulfilling ancient prophecies, please do not schedule this for 2012. One solution is to isolate and completely change smaller units, expanding the changes to ever-larger groups until eventually the entire system is transformed. In addition to allowing the changes to be accomplished in manageable chunks, this approach would allow "test implementations" that could be used as a proof of concept. The first efforts might be a laboratory to test ideas and to design a working model. Failure would not be fatal, but only instructional. Paraphrasing Thomas Edison "At least we know one thing that doesn't work".

Our goal then, becomes two-fold: Design the model that will be tested, and come up with a way to actually realize that model. Over the next few weeks, the tools will be made available to start the discussions and to engage those who have the passion and knowledge to create the concept. If you would like to participate, check back at this blog. Be prepared though, you will also need enough strength of your convictions to follow through on the final design. Would you invest in such a model, or even live there?