sandoz

There is something very weird going on. Flipboard has managed to take an exciting step forward whilst simultaneously taking a comforting step backwards.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

The intimidatingly smart Eleanor Barlow and I were chatting about what technology meant the other day. To be fair EB had a pretty damn good stab at defining it, i cheated and looked it up on some 'technology'. I found this:

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Looking through the winners @Cannes2010 it's as clear as ever that good advertising has always created a sense of value:

• Charm (John Lewis)
• Humour (Old Spice)
• Inspiration (VW Fun Theory)
  and more recently

• Interaction (Wrangler Europe)
• Education (We Choose The Moon)
  

Certainly successful, and great work. I wish i had made each one. However they are mostly a fleeting exchange, episodic, stay tuned for the next episode. There is little tangible reward beyond the initial emotional high. What's perhaps missing is legacy. A platform for ongoing exchange and reward.

London won the 2012 Olympics bid because of legacy. They asked the question what else can the Olympics do for you?

I'm always much more excited by advertising when it asks the same question.

• Nike Livestrong & Chalkbot are doing all they can to cure cancer.
• Gatorade Replay inspires a whole community to come back together.
• Pedigree Adoption Drive saves dogs lives.
• Support Scent gives support to a minority.
• Twelpforce fundamentally changes the BestBuy business model.
• Levi's/Goodwill CareTag recycles your jeans and helps save the planet.
• Ikea Showroom ingeniously gives you a new bed.
• Samsung Shakedown gives you a free phone.
• VW Real Racing gives you new episodes and upgrades, which you pay for!

It's a fantastic trend which we're seeing more and more of. Here Levi's set their advertising in a run down city with the promise to help it back onto it's feet (an example from elsewhere of things they may do here), Pepsi Refresh commits $1.3m towards the Gulf, Starbucks surprising crowd-sourced answer to replacing the disposable cup wasn't a cup at all and at the other end of the scale Green Giant tomatoes help you grow virtual tomatoes in Farmville. All have legacy of sorts. Sure there are plenty more examples out there if i could think of them right now.

Also if you look further afield into social innovation with ideas like Sidekick's tweeting Buddy radio, or this fantastic wearable tech by Calum, a student at Dundee, or this study in mobile health tools it's clear that brands can have a big part to play in this kind of thinking. Then there is random ideas like Cupidtino a dating site for Apple fans. It's a platform not an episode. It's an idea with legacy too, if not actually by Apple or really advertising... just yet. Or perhaps Gatorade's war room which could easily shift from an immediate view of now, to an ongoing platform of next.

It's the shift from being a broadcaster to a service provider. From being a talker to being a doer.

Legacy doesn't have to be worthy. Or mutually exclusive to values such as charm and humour. In fact perhaps if it is worthy it still needs a buff man 'on a horse' to front it. It can be integrated through any channel. Legacy can be simply creating some tangible value from the idea, as shown by some examples above. However, it's nice if it is worthy too. CSR and CRM have never been closer. It's the bigger picture i get really excited about. The world's kinda fucked. It's hard to fix. Do brands and ultimately advertising have the power to help make it better. I think so.

Exciting times. It's clearly not always possible or perhaps right to create legacy. But there are plenty of chances. Lets get on with it.

Incidentally, here i am in Cannes. 'Hanging out' (moreover hassling) with Zuckerberg (who was very nice) in the Gutter bar. Time approx 3am. C'est la guerre.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Invested in my first KickStarter project yesterday.
It's a project by a chap i don't know but follow on twitter because he's interesting - @bud_caddell
He proved my 'following faith' recently by kicking off a project to crowdsource a book about the future of marketing, and used KickStarter to raise cash to make it happen.
He raised about $5k in 3 days or something impressive like that.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

I was initially troubled by this. Even though laudable to approach social media with such alacrity, perhaps too machine like?
But then it dawned on me that this is so spot on for the brand. Approach it like a technical science that helps you win. The genius here isn't applied social media for business analysis and dialogue. The Gatorade Mission Control is a content platform. A big idea. Elevate it into full marketing as it could be great advertising. Truly open.
Now you have all this information and knowledge, what are you going to do with it?
Look forward to seeing what next. They just need to remember to add the charm to the robots. Sports coverage has commentators.

More here from Contagious.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

This just popped up in my feed (thanks @ROKKANmedia), illustrating a new trend surfacing in TV content promotion from the US. An extension to product placement.

Promoting the new series of True Blood, here is Snoop Dogg showing his love for Sookie Stackhouse. A complete bespoke written Bon Temps love song.

It follows Glee going all Madonna releasing a really well judged version of Vogue online with Sue Sylvester.

Product placement has been around a long while. Longer probably than we think. But it used to be subtle and appropriate. Now it's shameless or cleverly written in. Which i kinda prefer. It's better than stopping the show every 5 minutes for an ad break.

Vampires love the Wii. Twice. 30 Rock writes them into the script. Scrubs CoffeeBucks is dumb but very effective. Appropriately.
And Lady Gaga, she went all out with Telephone (57m views and counting):

More stuff on placement and interestingly displacement on this blog. And the UK is following fast with this passed last year.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Very impressed with the winning answer to the Starbucks Betacup design competition to reduce the number of non-recyclable cups that are thrown away every year by creating a more convenient alternative to the reusable coffee cup.

To quote Mashable

The winning entry, which was chosen by a jury of designers, engineers and entrepreneurs out of a pool of 430 designs, was surprisingly simple: It’s a chalkboard. Customers who bring in a reusable mug can put a mark on the board, and every tenth guest receives a free beverage.

“There are plenty of great reusable mugs out there,” the entry says. “But what people really need is an incentive to make the behavior change — a free cup of coffee and a bit of peer pressure.”

10 reasons why i like it:

1. It approached the problem from a behavioral perspective not a product perspective and gained clear insight.
2. It is completely 'now' in terms of social ideas, random acts of kindness and is in some sense a game.
3. It feels techie and web principled, even though it doesn't need technology to implement.
4. It's completely targeted to the modern web savvy, socially aware Starbucks customer. The customer they want.
5. It builds on existing behavior - reusable mugs and loyalty cards are not a new idea. People are comfortable with the concept of both.
6. It's built around the intimacy of the local coffee shop who know your name and where you know the other customers a bit.
7. It rewards all customers with a sense of well being (not just the winner) which is also transferred to the Starbucks brand.
8. It can be implemented for a tiny cost in every store tomorrow. There is no manufacture or major cost.
9. It may also make money for Starbucks selling more reusable mugs.
10. It's great marketing.

Great thinking, very elegant, and an example that backs up some of my thoughts about design and advertising thinking blending.

I hope it works. I think it will.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

I was asked this question some time ago in and interview whilst moving from a design job to an advertising job. To be honest i hadn't really thought about it much, I just liked making cool things. I think i mumbled something anodyne about advertising setting up a message or story that design brings to life.

It's always a bit of a stand-off. Advertisers seems to think that Designers don't have ideas, which naturally pisses Designers off. To defend the Advertisers, that is not surprising, as from school days they have been taught to search for, and revere, the big idea. Truth is good Designers have tons of great ideas, they are just a different kind of idea than an advertising idea, traditionally answering a different question. Different, not less valuable. The two can co-exist beautifully together.

Anyway, the answer to the question finally surfaced in my head all these years later, not on purpose i might add, i've not exactly been thinking about it... still! More around it. The difference between design and advertising is:

Man, i would have looked smart had i answered that question like that back then. I'm not sure i was wrong in the first place. It's true that Advertising is storytelling thinking, brought to life by the systematic thinking of Design. It just turns out the answer was deeper than that. And more important.

Which is why i'm bangin' on about it now. What i realised whilst 'not' particularly thinking about this today is the role Design thinking has to play in the future of Advertising. A user centric position is key to solving many problems today, and a principal that the internet has accelerated and now demands. Advertising, brands and moreover the businesses behind them now need to embrace this design led thinking - service, utility, passive usable response, personal etc - to really engage the modern audience now that brand centric thinking is increasingly missing the mark and feeling outdated.

A great applied example of this again comes from Cluetrain. The difference between CRM and VRM.

It's a simple task when approaching a business problem from an advertising perspective to ask yourself design orientated questions. I bet you come up with fresh, modern, answers.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

We've been thinking bigger about digital recently. How the flow of information and conversation has a wider impact on businesses than just their social media and advertising. Which got me thinking about the Industrial Revolution and the internet.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

You will find Work Club along Newcomen Street. So named after the rather charitable Mrs N.
Thomas Newcomen, however never knew Mrs N, but he did invent a Steam Powered Atmospheric Engine around 1712 and is regarded as a forefather of the Industrial Revolution. Nice example of the ease of knowledge and connection flowing around the internet. It took me about 1 minute to learn that.

It turns out there are actually two Industrial Revolutions, roughly one powered by steam kicking off around 1740, and a second powered by electricity around 1820. It's pretty clear that we are now living through a 3rd. This one powered by information.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Now, i am in no way qualified to talk about the socioeconomic and cultural effects of industrial revolutions. But it's an interesting thing to chew on, if somewhat meaty.

One angle to think about is this 3rd revolution is showing signs of reversing some the behaviors and structures that its predecessors built up. Namely in the business, which is arguably the major end-product of the Industrial revolutions to date.

The business is a big corporate ship:

And in one sense this new revolution follows similar patterns. It's certainly based around manufacturing and service. Digital tools and utility are buzzwords of web 2.0. Apps and the Internet-of-things could well be the new Spinning Jenny and Combustion Engine. But, the open, democratic conversations and relationships founded upon the information flow of the internet are ill at ease with the closed, hierarchical structures founded upon the old work place.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Businesses need to adapt. They need to understand that their wealth is in the talented people who choose to work there, and that these talented people are increasingly at odds with the business credo. Location, hours, hierarchy, contracts, reward, career are all things being affected by this Information Revolution. This is where we are going to see massive socioeconomic and cultural change.

So how does a business harness this opportunity? Somewhat too large a question to answer in a post. However i think there are a couple of things that can start the ball rolling:

That's just two, there are surely many more on further consideration. So it's time to understand that information, and digital channels do not just mean trend forecasting and an advertising possibility. They are driving new behavior that will fundamentally change the business, and it is clearly digital thinking and tools that are the way to survive and thrive.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Stumbled across this on Wikipedia just now:

Simple.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Yay! The clever Über digital rockstars that are Tom and Odin of Nation went and made a physical like button... :)

(see older PLB post 1 here)

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Thought i would capture my thoughts on Apple.com winning Black at D&AD. These are my thoughts that helped me towards the decision of nominating whilst on the jury. It may give you an interesting insight, and probably cause a debate or two.

Apple.com is a contentious decision for a Black Pencil. When you first hear of it i can understand a negative/confused reaction. I was the same initially. However, when you live with it for a short while, as i did, i believe it becomes a very clear-cut example of an exemplar, an influencer and, whilst perhaps less so a paradigm shift in terms of speed, certainly a tectonic shift in terms of effect over time. I'm pleased it won.

Here are a few of the reasons behind the decision, in my mind:

1. A black pencil should not be and is not a decision taken lightly.

This was a grand debate. And not an obvious answer. In some respect that itself backs up the outcome. For it to come through such a examination, from many angles (btw Mac Fanboy nature works against it in this instance - it makes it harder to win because it's obvious), and triumph illustrates to me that D&AD is not afraid to set markers where they need to be marked, and that the right call was made.

D&AD judging is fair. You don't vote for a Black Pencil. You vote for yellow, (and that's a blind vote) then it gets a hell of a grilling and a large mixed jury discussion about whether it merits black. It's perhaps interesting to think about the collective talent and opinion in that room for black pencil judging (not the yellow stuff that i did, can't vouch for the smarts there ;).
Apple.com won through.

If many other brands took their lead from how Apple use, iterate and care for their website i would be pleased and the web would be better.

2. Philosophy.

This site is good enough to lick, just like the products. This is paramount. They, more than anyone, understand the value of looking forward in design and best practice. The site must and does do that.

The site's fundamental function however isn't to my mind great looking product, it's education before you purchase a product. Mac knows its stuff is very cool. But it's also very usable and friendly and helpful. The site backs that up. It's not just about aesthetic it's about the function of that aesthetic. That's good design. It's a very good tool.

Finally don't forget this is e-commerce.

3. Apple.com is a long standing exemplar of online brand and e-commerce.

Has the site changed in a decade? Of course it has, but perhaps you could also say it has iterated rather than changed. The platform has grown just like the product range and the popularity. Again a permanence that other brands could emulate. Much of marketing now is about platforms and investment rather than flux.

I don't know every nook and cranny of the site, i'm sure there are things i would not like or want to do differently, however the vast majority of it i think is great, any area i explore or read or judge i see as excellent. More importantly i see its influence everywhere.

If you are a designer, how many times have you used Apple.com in a presentation or review to get across a point about how you want something to work. Whether the drop shadow, gradient, footer, glossy product shots, simplicity, information layout, help films, scrolling gallery, or simply an overall emotional impression of how a website can support a product and sell it, or how brand, information and sales can be elegantly merged. It is an undeniably a massive influencer.

If you are an ad creative, how many times have you asked for it to look like the Apple site?
Btw i totally think this site is advertising, not just design.

The aesthetic of the site has influenced 1bn downloads at the App store. Just look at the design of the apps, (or CSS sites for that matter, or any web2.0 styling) They all follow the faux-physical, textured simplicity of Apple.com. Arguably 2009 was Apple.com's most influential year in graphic design alone.

So that's why now. It's never been entered before. Yes it's been around a long while, but it moves with the times. Moreover it moves the times as its influence is really telling now.

4. This is a website category.

Whilst a Black Pencil is not a political tool, it must be earned, it is without doubt a powerful message. D&AD websites category is dominated by Flash and campaign tools. They are worthy contenders for a pencil and rightly so, some fantastic work. BUT the game is moving on, getting broader. HTML 5 Vs Flash debate heats up etc. This is not a decision taken in the past, it's a decision taken to the future. http://www.apple.com/html5/. Apple.com will continue to set standards in web design. It will arguably be more influential.

The fact that the category is dominated by Flash and campaigns is a shame. That's not a fair reflection of websites, or as i have mentioned where websites are going. Perhaps people would not enter a great site like this into D&AD before. Perhaps they will now. I would like to see them.

Ok, so what if Amazon was entered, or Google, or NYT, or Chat Roulette (ok maybe not Chat Roulette). Well who knows. I know it would be judged on its merits and weakness' like any other. It would get a proper going over and be weighed accordingly.  Like Apple.com.

So congrats Apple.com for winning. Congrats to D&AD for having balls to take a provocative choice and set a standard that is not immediately obvious. I don't think it was an easy call. I think you have to think about it and reach your own decision. You may or may not agree. So it goes.
Personally i think it's great and I look forward to seeing more digital design/tools of this caliber represented in the awards in the future.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Really pleased how McLaren's Race 1.1b is looking on the iPad.
Perhaps need to make the app.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Google TV = Open TV.

∴

*insert fav program here*
+
interactivity and platforms:
all the backchannel and wonder of the internet plus access to all the platforms such as amazon, twitter, trip advisor, B3TA ad infinitum.
x
the creativity of YouTube:
all the UGC energy and nonsense from all walks of life on all subjects. all deep indexed (video is searchable with YouTube via it's automatic subtitling), tagged and unstoppable.
x
the utility of the App Store:
all the tools, innovation and entrepreneurial spirit that has fueled the meteroic rise of mobile apps... on the TV.
x
the social graph of Facebook:
all shared with your friends.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So, big points/questions:

1. The speed of adoption will depend on the quality of content delivered.
2. How will Broadcast networks/TV networks/Program makers/Advertisers respond to this opportunity?
3. Could YouTube become a default way of broadcasting a TV stream?
4. Is this the return of Wayne's World style TV?
5. What exactly now constitutes a TV screen?
6. We're going to see some fun new ways of interacting with the TV. Not just ancillary/concurrent digital content, but via Android by voice.
7. Is Android starting to tip?

Google, google, google, google, google, google.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Google TV will enable you to switch between broadcast - or recorded - tv and the internet on your television.
All searchable by Google. All powered by Chrome and Android. It will be open, fueled by user generated Apps and controlled by your phone... or your voice. The possibilities are kinda endless and mind boggling.

Top line... here is what you need to know:

1. Yay! We will be able to seamlessly move between broadcast TV content and Web content on your television.
   It will also probably overlap with poppy-up things and notifications using HTML 5.
   SEARCH - This is Google after all.

2. You will be able to search content on your TV just like you do on the web through a simple single search box.
   Which means the EPG is now contextual/filtered to your requests. It's personalised.
   It can search channels, content - inc. upcoming content to add to DVR - and content from the web.
   For example in YouTube (behind the scenes content?) and Amazon (Book of the film?) + a million other better examples. You can even have picture in picture so you don't have to stop watching.
   YOU TUBE LEAN BACK

3. It will queue up YouTube content to play continuously, playlists etc. So you can create your own channels, and automatically share content from friends.
   
   Family TV seems like a nice idea, I could upload films of what i am doing that can play on my Parents TV. Interrupt Antiques Roadshow with a new film of my holiday? Party TV curated from all your favourite clips? Paid for content on YouTube?
   Will the channels (BBC, ITV, SKY) all default to YouTube as their broadcast stream?
   ANDROID

4. The software is based on Android. So any non-mobile Android app will be able to work on your television.
   It's open source so anyone will be able to make apps for television supporting their favourite programs. They all run in Chrome.
   This is the true revolution. TV and Web coming together great, we've been waiting for that, but it's the fact that the web will be App generated that makes the whole thing super interesting, the possibilities are endless, just as we have seen on the iPhone. Google have also announced the Google Chrome Web Store. Expect lots of content being created by the masses.
   
   What does it mean for advertising? Direct response, deeper interaction, changed metrics?
   Will have to think about this one a bit more... but it could change everything! Will people want a website sitting directly behind the TV ad, assuming TV ads are still interruptive that is? If so then all TV spots need a landing page behind them. Will I shout a word at the TV to open the site (see point 5). I could perhaps just shout 'BUY!' and it connects to my PayPal account and 1 day later the product is delivered to my door!!?
   Product placement in TV shows also changes, as a site can list all the placements, or i can pause the show to explore the product that was 'placed' in more detail.
   Will credits now be listed on the website?
   Where does Facebook get involved? Will the 'like' button work? Will I download my content from an App. True Blood Series 3 Android App? It will add a layer to sports, or Xfactor or just about anything really. I think my TV will have a homepage.
   Questions, questions questions. I'm really going to have to have a long think about this.

5. Control is yet to be defined, a keyboard and track pad, but can be controlled by any Android device. Like a phone.
   The internet of things is interesting here. Android armchair?
   Or just controlled by speech!
   VISUAL EXPERIENCE AND INTERACTION

6. Content will need to be reconsidered for this experience. Distance from the screen, scale, colour, more passive interaction, social watching, fortunately Google is very helpful with some handy starters here http://www.google.com/tv/developer/
   I began my career designing for TV, looks like i'm going full circle :)
   PS

7. It can run Flash :o
   FINALLY

8. Do people really want their TV to do all this?
   Google preach simplicity above all. Which is good advice. But given the challenges the so called 'digital immigrants' have had with the internet in other facets, how will they take to it invading the holiest of entertainment holys. Our TV!

You can follow the stream here over on Engadget.
& a video of the presentation will probably appear here soon.
& You can see the Sony TV here and the Logitech companion box here.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

With social plugins Facebook now stretches its influence across the web.

+

The web now stretches everywhere. LBS + Linked Data + Facebook.

∴

It makes sense that FB could do what it's about to do for the web to the world at large.

so

How long before i buy a Coke at Tesco with Facebook Credits on my phone?

or

How long before the T-Shirt i just bought at Uniqlo with my Facebook credits is instantly shared with my 'Friends'?

or

How long before Nike Town has a physical 'like' button that can talk to my phone?

Anyone invented the physical 'like' button yet? Have to think on about it... be good to hear other peoples thoughts.

- - - - - update - - - - -

Lucy Anne added some nice context to this that i'd missed/been to lazy too look for, with FB testing QR codes and, despite lack of official LBS announcement at F8, the use of Facebook presence with RFID around the confernce.

Which makes me think that accelerated development of Near Field Communication would be a better way than QR or RFID but perhaps a more troublesome birth. Maybe FB should just bring out a card, that i can just to check-in, pay etc. Or maybe just a badge with RFID on my 'lapel' would be good. That's surely not that hard and you can pass the expense directly onto the consumer who wants it. The mobile will eventually supersede but perhaps be less fun.

- - - - - update 2 - - - - -

Yay Tom and Odin at Nation went and made one...

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

What you need to know:

1. 100 million Apple devices access the web via Apps not Search. So a 'Yelp' App not 'Google'.
2. iAds must not ruin the App experience if you expect users to click/touch on them.

Why it's big.

1. Not new - It's a banner leading to small site. People are comfortable with it.
2. Polite - It doesn't detract from the App. Non-disruptive user-experience if engaged. Nested advertising.
3. Rich - Makes use of all the tech and interactivity an iPhone can offer. Great interactive/emotional storytelling and content platform for brands.
4. Intelligent - It uses all the APIs on offer, importantly context to the user, location and the parent App.
5. Incentive - 60% of the revenue goes to the App developer fueling the market for small developers to make great things and be rewarded. AND keep free Apps free to the user.
6. Mass - huge growing market that's set to explode further with the iPad.
7. Direct - No intermediary media buy is required. Like FB and Google the network can be easily accessed and controlled by anyone.
8. Competitive - It really screws with MSN ( web portal ) Google ( no Search ) and Adobe ( no Flash ). The fight is on.

The rest is up to you.

1. Make your media placement smart.
2. Make your banner simple, relevant, direct.
3. Make your destination engaging, rewarding and valuable.
4. Sell.

Some nice chap posted a relevant edit of the Keynote:

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

2010...
Innovation.

2007/2009
Web 3.0. Data. The internet of things. Software.
CSS3. HTML 5.
Big ideas. TTL. Open. Collaboration. Cultural insight.
Business. Problem solving. Start-up. Commerce.

2005/2007
Web 2.0. Social Media. Widgets. Utility. Mobile.
Advertising. Copy. Tech Direction. Strategy. Brief writing. Presenting.
Keynote.

2003/2005
Web Design. Interactive Film, Narrative, Gestural interaction. Shoots.
Pitching, Team management. Creative Direction.

2000/2002
InteractiveTV. Content Creation. Interaction. Games. Tools. Apps. Creative technology.
Graphic design. Motion Graphics. Editing. TV Channel Branding. Branding. Art Direction. Idea generation.
Deadlines. Client presentation.

1999
3D Studio Max. Flash. After Effects.
BCIs. Post-humanism.

1997/1998
Failing at freelance illustration.
Photoshop. Illustrator.

1993/1996
Gouache. Illustration. Information design. Visual communication. Brief solving.
Power Macintosh 500. Aldus Freehand.

1991/1993
Techncal Drawing. Trimetric projection. Airbush painting.
Caricature.
Macintosh Classic.

1989/91
Perspective drawing. Woodwork. Metalwork. Model making.
Macintosh SE, Deja Vu. Aldus Page Maker.

1985/1991
Acorn Archimedes 440 Paint. BBC B. Amiga 500 Delux Paint. ZX Spectrum.
Castle of Riddles. PaperBoy. Sabre Wulf. Wizadore. Citadel. Jet Set Willy. Way Of The Exploding Fist. Yie Ar Kung-Fu. Elite.
Graffiti.

1978/1985.
Drawing.

1973/1977.
Scribbling.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

A paper i wrote during a Post Grad course in 99 all about uploading your brain. I just found it on an old drive!!!!1 Seems quite appropriate really.

Is it time to punch out of this yawn factory?

Everyone's been there. Life gets a little too much and all you want to do is hide away and stick your head in the sand. Stress at work, unrequited love, little voices in your head, whatever your reasons for wanting out...hang on. For the more dramatic amongst us don't reach for the Wednesday night special just yet there's an alternative. Posthumanism. Technology in the near future will be able to sustain a clone of a living organism in a virtual world. Bollocks! Not at all, this is a serious alternative, or maybe I should say will be a serious alternative. This future will allow you to upload yourself into a computer reality and your own private u(or dis)topia. The aim of this paper is to explain this technology/ideal simply with regards in particular to the practice of uploading. I shall initially attempt a brief explanation of what is Posthumanism and then in turn decipher the process of Uploading. I will also take a cursory glance at the structure and processes of the human brain as I feel understanding this will help the plausibility of the subject at heart. Finally I will outline a series of proposed processes to achieve this aim. I make no reference to the social and ethical ramifications of such practice as that is another paper entirely. For now let us concern ourselves with an explanation and overview of something fanciful, something that may occur or may not, either way it's pretty interesting stuff.

Posthumanism? ...After Life? Yea, but not really. Terminology such as After Life and also Transcendence (although certainly applicable) tend to imply a heavy degree of the spiritual or dualism. What is evident in Posthumanism is the lack of dualism (mind and soul) in favour of materialism (mind), in other words it assumes that the mind arises solely from activity in the brain, and is not influenced from other sources. This will be discussed further in more detail. Posthumanism as a subject is best described as an extension of existence, or a method of dealing with, and overcoming the limitations of the human form. It is an area encompassing many aspects other than that of just uploading and I feel in the interest of a better understanding it is necessary to first briefly explore other sub areas in order to paint a broader picture.

Biological/Medical

In biological and medically terms it could be said that posthumanism is a paramount concern. Evident in some way in all areas the best examples come in the shape of prosthetics, artificial organs and complex surgery. Others are the breaking down of disease, formulation of cure alongside the whole issue of DNA and cloning, an important subject in itself. Issues of prolonged life through better health and improvement in sensory organs through either chemical or mechanical injection are equally important, the whole area of the cyborg runs parallel to that of uploading in the aspect of direct computer involvement. Regarding the brain, chemical injections have already shown positive effects, as drugs such as 'Vasopressin'(1) can boost the degree of human memory allowing us to make ourselves more intelligent. Another aspect is research into implanting brain tissue or the removal of damaged tissue. This aspect is fuelling complex research into the structure of the brain, the make up of what parts control what thoughts and actions. Basically tinkering around in a very complex fuse box in an attempt to rewire.

Cryogenics Technically this has existed since the first ice age. More recently, and in more controlled conditions, it is simply the freezing and maintaining of the human body in a period of sustained stasis until the technology to prolong actual existence is ready to do just that. Allegedly, Walt Disney has been residing in this particular analogy of 'Sleeping Beauty' for many years. It has also probably fuelled many a speculative claim to the resurrection of Elvis.

Immersion Simply put 'Brains in Vats.'(2) The complete separation of the brain from the body, stored in vats and connected to specialised machinery (high powered computer networks.) This is not as fanciful as it may seem at first glance, it is also not a new idea. Scientists in the 1920's were aware of the idea but rejected due to the fact that it was prohibitive of total free will. It is important to note that although aware of the ideal, they could not have had the first clue how to execute it, so it would have seemed a preposterous suggestion. This is no longer the case as with the onset of the super computer and Virtual Reality it is now possible to model complete sustainable worlds allowing for all capricious needs.

Uploading. Uploading is in many aspects similar to the process of total immersion as they both require 100% interaction with a computer interface. There is however one major difference, with uploading the brain no longer exists in it's original meat form and therefore is completely detached from any real human existence. Its contents are loaded up into a computer matrix which will sustain its existence for as long as required or until the hard disk eats itself! Uploading is named after the analogous process in computing of transferring a file from one computer to a more expansive one. A good explanation comes from the Extropy Institute(3), who state if one rejects spiritualism then evidence asserts that consciousness is caused by activity in the nervous systems. Therefore elements such as memory, identity, belief, desire and self-awareness are all encoded in the synaptic interconnection of neurons. If this process can be identified then it can be cloned and therefore uploaded into virtual indefinite existence. This means that personality, doctrines, ideals etc can also be uploaded alongside processes of synaptic response to create a highly accurate duplication of the original meat brain.

The Brain Process.

There's a nice phrase that goes ' If our brain was simple enough for us to understand it, then we would be so simple we couldn't understand it.' Which is a flippant way of saying that at present much isn't really known about the functional processes of the human brain. In many ways problems arise in trying to decipher which of the given statistics are statistically correct as many of the facts and figures given are so diverse. What I aim to draw here is a working drawing of an operation 'in materialism' that is believed to be the stem of all consciousness, and in doing so illustrate how it can be recreated in an artificial neural network i.e. the computer. The brain has long been thought of as a computer of sorts and the idea has probably emerged alongside discoveries of the sequential process within. In the simplest form, and I mean simple terms, the brains hierarchy consists of:

Synapses - The tip of connection between neurons
Neurons - Actual brain cells
Local Circuits - Small cell networks
Maps - Spatially organised topographical maps
Systems - e.g. The visual system

We know that firing synapses cause connection between neurons and subsequently the networks and maps. It would also appear that the storage of long term memory (most important to uploading) takes place by changes in the neural process, such as branched connections between neurons and the number and productivity of the synapses involved. It is also known that damage to certain areas of the brain causes damage to specific systems such as speech, comprehension, co-ordination etc. What this brief, rather uniformed, paragraph tells us, and proves the point I'm trying to make, is that the brain has an operational process analogous to that of a computer algorithm, or programming language, and is also compartmentalised like a drive system. If the method of the brain can be 100% mapped and identified and the synapse/neuron activity involved in certain tasks be proven then it can be duplicated. Obviously the brain consists of much, much more and there are many more cells which would need to be considered if uploading were to come to fruition. A couple of examples are Glia (glue) cells serving mostly support functions and Astrocytes which are believed to affect information processing by regulating or slowing neural signal mechanisms.(4)

The capacity of the brain is another blurred area with many suggestions being offered to its actual computational power. Estimates for neuron capacity range from 5 Billion to a Trillion in the human brain(5). Due to these inaccuracies it is almost immeasurable at this stage in scientific development, which suggests that these figures offered of the brains power in bytes are purely empirical. It is widely thought that, by computer standards, the brain operates at a slow pace. Which, from an uploading perspective, is positive as it implies that the required power needed to sustain a fully functional digital brain is, if not already, achievable.

The Uploading Process.

At present the process of uploading the mind is 100% blue sky or empirical, however this hasn't derailed the proposal of theories or abated extensive research. The brain has already been extensively mapped, scanned and dissected in various ways, all of which, the results of, provide the basis for information required for an upload. There are two main categories proposed, destructive or non-destructive. The simpler of the two is the destructive method, as it allows easy access to all areas of the brain in detail, as it systematically destroys it either slice by slice or neuron by neuron. It does however mean that you only have one go. A bit risky, as if something goes wrong then the lights go out permanently. A non-destructive technique would avoid this problem by managing to scan and map the brain in its functioning state without causing any irrevocable damage.

Destructive Techniques.

I'll deal with the destructive method first as it requires the smallest leap in our technological know-how and therefore is the easiest to actually carry out. There are three main proposals for this area:

The Microtome procedure.

Microtomy is the process of using a microtome to cut ultra thin cross sections of embedded tissue. A microtome is the instrument that holds a steel, glass or diamond knife at the required angle to cut sections of prepared tissue of equal thickness. The process requires the freezing of the brain either chemically or by liquid nitrogen, and it is then sliced, by the above procedure, into a series of sequential sections. These are then scanned at very high resolution into the computer, which uses the data to reconstruct an exact duplicate. Slicing and scanning in this manner has occurred for many years in medical and psychiatric research but always at modest scan sizes. For this technique, which appears quite plausible, to be successful then the scan size needs to be greatly improved upon and at better resolution.

Nanoreplacement.

This procedure requires a seamless mix between man and machine as billions of microscopic gizmos are injected into the brain and take up residence near or actually in the existing neurons. They are basically highly sophisticated surveillance equipment which monitor the BIOS activity of the neuron until it knows enough to predict the outcome and take over the procedure itself. Where upon it destroys the meat neuron. The immediate problem facing this technique is the size of the job at hand, due to the sheer number of neurons involved. Also the micromachines would, while still retaining a size and mass relative to the neuron (approximately 0.1mm), have to be extremely powerful and complex. A tricky problem for the developers of nanotechnology. Perhaps not an unsolvable one though, as it is at present unclear as to exactly what nanotechnology will and wont be able to achieve.

The Moravec Procedure.

This one is my particular favourite, and the most likely to turn the stomach of the squeamish and arachnophobes. It is proposed by Hans Moravec(6), a principal research scientist in robotics and a celebrated author of subjects regarding robotic and human intelligence interaction. A manipulator, similar to a highly sophisticated hand, containing branch upon branch down to nanometer scale sensitive fingers is placed into the patient's head. The tiny fingers start peeling away the brain, closing blood cells to stem the mess, and using chemical and electronic sensors it then monitors the activity of the exposed cells. When it's figured out what they all do and how, it then configures the simulation. It would continue to proceed in this manner throughout the brain, bit by tiny bit, until all is extensively mapped. To me this is a fantastic, if fanciful idea, and a bit like having a big metal spider placed inside your head. Perhaps the most disturbing point here is that the patient (victim in the early test stages) would have to remain conscious throughout the whole procedure to allow accurate monitoring of the neuron placement and activity. It is also the most difficult to achieve technologically and there are many complicated issues in the areas of nanotechnology and scanning that need to be resolved before any production. Issues that we are no where near knowing the answers to today.

Non Destructive Techniques.

The proposed techniques for non-destructive uploading are generally based around current knowledge of various scanning techniques. At first glance they do not appear as fun as the destructive methods i.e. no head spiders, and in all aspects require vast forward leaps in technology in order to be plausible options. Amongst the various suggestions are the use of Gamma and X Ray holography which would produce three-dimensional recordings at near atomic levels of resolution. MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) suggests using magnetic technology to cause atoms in the brain to emit radio waves, which are collected and analysed to produce similar three-dimensional maps as the previous methods. The technology requires for these procedures is already widely in use and being constantly researched on live subjects, but is very much at a fledgling level and it may never be able to provide the degree of sophistication in resolution required.

Correlation Mapping.

The most intriguing of the non-destructive proposals is Correlation mapping, in which billions of nanoscale probes are injected into the cerebrospinal fluid. In a manner similar to the destructive nanoreplacement process, each monitors a neurons activity, but instead of destroying the host it gives a chemical code to the neuron, like a complex barcode. Its activity is then regularly relayed back to a server which correlates all the information about the cells to formulate an accurate map and simulation of the brain.(7)

Conclusion.

To conclude what do we now know? Well, that there exists a high degree of similarity between the functioning processes of the human brain and a computer network, also that it would appear plausible to say that in the near future the idea of the virtual, digital brain will become reality.
I have made no attempt to address the social ramifications of such developments or the concept of identity, ego and self once an upload is established. This as a subject is a minefield. There are issues regarding memory loss and degradation, which would not occur in future computers, and also aspects of emotion and adrenaline. Issues such as logical and illogical thought process or population explosion are also important and form the basis for a future paper.
I have simply wished to show an overview of the process in simple to understand terms. The subject is vast and will become more so as the relevant technology and understanding emerges. It is by no means apparent at this stage which of the reviewed methods may actually succeed and its probably safest to say a combination of all would be the best solution. As stated this is speculative science and has more than passing references to mad scientists and horrors of 'Frankenstein'. But this will change, certainly the Microtome procedure requires little development in order to achieve fruition, and testing on the brains of rodents and other small creatures is producing fast developments in our understanding of process, scanning and mapping.
I have also made no attempt to note the hardware requirements of such uploads. I feel this would have made the paper to technical, something I didn't wish to do. I also feel this would have detracted from the main point of identifying correlation between the brain and computer, and a convincing explanation of the plausibility of this future area of science.

References
(1) Vasopressin - Information on this drug was taken from the paper: What is Post Humanism by Daniel C Ust
(2) Brains In Vats - Virtual Reality: Give us a clue - Dr Mike King Professor Frank Tipler - www.eeng.dcu.ie/~tkpu/people/tipler.
(3) Exropy Institute - www.extopy.org
(4) Information on the brain taken from - J.Strout www.metalab.unc.edu/jstrout/uploading
(5) Information on the brain taken from - www.weber.u.washington.edu/~chudler/facts www.mickey.utmem.edu/personnel/paper Ralph Merkle www.merkle.com
(6) Hans Moravec - www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm
(7) Information on Upload processes from - J.Strout www.metalb.unc.edu/jstrout/uploading
Other references include.
www.phys.Isu/students/dhall.
/> Extropy and Transhumanist Art - James lweis.
Posthumanism 101 - Diana Slattery.
The Future? We're virtually there - Ray Kurzwell - The Guardian 16.1.99.
Dery, Mark, Escape Velocity. London : Hodder and Stoughton Featherstone, mike and Rodger Burrows (Eds).
Cyberspace/cyberbodies/cyberpunk: Cultures of technological embodiment. London: Sage, 1995.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »