GUIDE#6: literature

Paranoiac-Critical spontaneous method of irrational knowledge: the moment is near when by a procedure of active paranoiac thought, it will be possible to systematize confusion and contribute to the total discrediting of the world of reality

Paranoiac-Critical activity: spontaneous method of irrational knowledge, based on the interpretive, critical association of delirious phenomena

Putting on canvas with the most imperial fury of precision, the images of concrete irrationality

Minimalism * Red-haired man /  (Daniil Charms)

Letters From a Stoic by Lucius Annaeus Seneca


Joseph Brodsky’s basics


GUIDE#5: architecture

Global History of Architecture

Living Architecture


Department of Architecture @M.I.T. /  МАРХИ

Struggle toward more important goals, of which the first would be to make each experience of my life classical, to endow it with a form, a cosmogony, a synthesis, and an eternal architecture.

Painting of the future will be classical, imperial, and existentialist. after the minimization it will become MAXIMIZED.

Painting is hand-done color photography of the superfine, extravagant, hyperaesthetic, virtual images of concrete irrationality (1929)

The individual can allow all the unformulated ideas of his subconscous o unfold into his consciousness. /the most rigorous systematization of phenomena and of the most delirious kind of material, with the intention of making most excessively dangerous ideas tangibly creative

Everything must be measured in advance occupations as well as the emotions ought to experience through them

YALE: Roman Architecture


Advanced Structural Analysis



The Beaubourg effect, the Beaubourg machine, the Beaubourg thing – how to give it a name? Enigma of this carcass of flux and signs, of networks and circuits – the final impulse to translate a structure that no longer has a name, the structure of social relations given over to superficial ventilation (animation, self-management, information, media) and to an irreversibly deep implosion. Monument to the games of mass simulation, the Pompidou Center functions as an incinerator absorbing all the cultural energy and devouring it – a bit like the black monolith in 2001: insane convection of all the contents that came there to be materialized, to be absorbed, and to be annihilated. All around, the neighborhood is nothing but a protective zone – remodeling, disinfection, a snobbish and hygienic design – but above all in a figurative sense: it is a machine for making emptiness. It is a bit like the real danger nuclear power stations pose: not lack of security, pollution, explosion, but a system of maximum security that radiates around them, the protective zone of control and deterrence that extends, slowly but surely, over the territory – a technical, ecological, economic, geopolitical glacis. What does the nuclear matter? The station is a matrix in which an absolute model of security is elaborated, which will encompass the whole social field, and which is fundamentally a model of deterrence (it is the same one that controls us globally, under the sign of peaceful coexistence and of the simulation of atomic danger).

The same model, with the same proportions, is elaborated at the Center: cultural fission, political deterrence.

This said, the circulation of fluids is unequal. Ventilation, cooling, electrical networks – the “traditional” fluids circulate there very well. Already the circulation of the human flux is less assured (the archaic solution of escalators in plastic sleeves, one ought to be aspirated, propelled, or something, but with a mobility that would be up to this baroque theatricality of fluids that is the source of the originality of the carcass). As for the material of the works, of objects, of books and the so-called polyvalent interior space, these no longer circulate at all. It is the opposite of Roissy, where from a futurist center of “spatial” design radiating toward “satellites,” etc., one ends up completely flat in front of . . . traditional airplanes. But the incoherence is the same. (What happened to money, this other fluid, what happened to its mode of circulation, of emulsion, of fallout at Beaubourg?)

Same contradiction even in the behavior of the personnel, assigned to the “polyvalent” space and without a private work space. On their feet and mobile, the people affect a cool demeanor, more supple, very contemporary, adapted to the “structure” of a “modern” space. Seated in their corner, which is precisely not one, they exhaust themselves secreting an artificial solitude, remaking their “bubble.” Therein is also a great tactic of deterrence: one condemns them to using all their energy in this individual defense. Curiously, one thus finds the same contradiction that characterizes the Beaubourg thing: a mobile exterior, commuting, cool and modern – an interior shriveled by the same old values.

This space of deterrence, articulated on the ideology of visibility, of transparency, of polyvalency, of consensus and contact, and sanctioned by the blackmail to security, is today, virtually, that of all social relations. All of social discourse is there, and on this level as well as on that of the treatment of culture, Beaubourg flagrantly contradicts its explicit objectives, a nice monument to our modernity. It is nice to think that the idea did not come to some revolutionary spirit, but to the logicians of the established order, deprived of all critical intelligence, and thus closer to the truth, capable, in their obstinacy, of putting in place a machine that is fundamentally uncontrollable, that in its very success escapes them, and that is the most exact reflection, even in its contradictions, of the current state of things.

Certainly, all the cultural contents of Beaubourg are anachronistic, because only an empty interior could correspond to this architectural envelope. The general impression being that everything here has come out of a coma, that everything wants to be animation and is only reanimation, and that this is good because culture is dead, a condition that Beaubourg admirably retraces, but in a dishonest fashion, whereas one should have triumphantly accepted this death and erected a monument or an anti-monument equivalent to the phallic inanity of the Eiffel Tower in its time. Monument to total disconnection, to hyperreality and to the implosion of culture-achieved today for us in the effect of transistorized circuits always threatened by a gigantic short circuit. Beaubourg is already an imperial compression – figure of a culture already crushed by its own weight – like moving automobiles suddenly frozen in a geometric solid. Like the cars of Caesar, survivors of an ideal accident, no longer external, but internal to the metallic and mechanical structure, and which would have produced tons of cubic scrap iron, where the chaos of tubes, levers, frames, of metal and human flesh inside is tailored to the geometric size of the smallest possible space – thus the culture of Beaubourg is ground, twisted, cut up, and pressed into its smallest simple elements – a bundle of defunct transmissions and metabolisms, frozen like a science-fiction mecanoid. But instead of breaking and compressing all culture here in this carcass that in any case has the appearance of a compression, instead of that, one exhibits Caesar there. One exhibits Dubuffet and the counterculture, whose inverse simulation acts as a referential for the defunct culture. In this carcass that could have served as a mausoleum to the useless operationality of signs, one reexhibits Tinguely’s ephemeral and autodestructive machines under the sign of the eternity of culture. Thus one neutralizes everything together: Tinguely is embalmed in the museal institution, Beaubourg falls back on its supposed artistic contents.

Fortunately, this whole simulacrum of cultural values is annihilated in advance by the external architecture.*1 Because this architecture, with its networks of tubes and the look it has of being an expo or world’s fair building, with its (calculated?) fragility deterring any traditional mentality or monumentality, overtly proclaims that our time will never again be that of duration, that our only temporality is that of the accelerated cycle and of recycling, that of the circuit and of the transit of fluids. Our only culture in the end is that of hydrocarbons, that of refining, cracking, breaking cultural molecules and of their recombination into synthesized products. This, the Beaubourg Museum wishes to conceal, but the Beaubourg cadaver proclaims. And this is what underlies the beauty of the cadaver and the failure of the interior spaces. In any case, the very ideology of “cultural production” is antithetical to all culture, as is that of visibility and of the polyvalent space: culture is a site of the secret, of seduction, of initiation, of a restrained and highly ritualized symbolic exchange. Nothing can be done about it. Too bad for the masses, too bad for Beaubourg.

What should, then, have been placed in Beaubourg?

Nothing. The void that would have signified the disappearance of any culture of meaning and aesthetic sentiment. But’this is still too romantic and destructive, this void would still have had value as a masterpiece of anticulture.

Perhaps revolving strobe lights and gyroscopic lights, striating the space, for which the crowd would have provided the moving base element?

In fact, Beaubourg illustrates very well that an order of simulacra only establishes itself on the alibi of the previous order. Here, a cadaver all in flux and surface connections gives itself as content a traditional culture of depth. An order of prior simulacra (that of meaning) furnishes the empty substance of a subsequent order, which, itself, no longer even knows the distinction between signifier and signified, nor between form and content.

The question: “What should have been placed in Beaubourg?” is thus absurd. It cannot be answered because the topical distinction between interior and exterior should no longer be posed. There lies our truth, the truth of Mobius-doubtless an unrealizable Utopia, but which Beaubourg still points to as right, to the degree to which any of its contents is a countermeaning and annihilated in advance by the form.

Yet-yet … if you had to have something in Beaubourg – it should have been a labyrinth, a combinatory, infinite library, an aleatory redistribution of destinies through games or lotteries – in short, the universe of Borges – or even the circular Ruins: the slowed-down enchainment of individuals dreamed up by each other (not a dreamworld Disneyland, a laboratory of practical fiction). An experimentation with all the different processes of representation: defraction, implosion, slow motion, aleatory linkage and decoupling – a bit like at the Exploratorium in San Francisco or in the novels of Philip K. Dick – in short a culture of simulation and of fascination, and not always one of production and meaning: this is what might be proposed that would not be a miserable anticulture. Is it possible? Not here, evidently. But this culture takes place elsewhere, everywhere, nowhere. From today, the only real cultural practice, that of the masses, ours (there is no longer a difference), is a manipulative, aleatory practice, a labyrinthine practice of signs, and one that no longer has any meaning.

In another way, however, it is not true that there is no coherence between form and content at Beaubourg. It is true if one gives any credence to the official cultural project. But exactly the opposite occurs there. Beaubourg is nothing but a huge effort to transmute this famous traditional culture of meaning into the aleatory order of signs, into an order of simulacra (the third) that is completely homogeneous with the flux and pipes of the facade. And it is in order to prepare the masses for this new semiurgic order that one brings them together here – with the opposite pretext of acculturating them to meaning and depth.

One must thus start with this axiom: Beaubourg is a monument of cultural deterrence. Within a museal scenario that only serves to keep up the humanist fiction of culture, it is a veritable fashioning of the death of culture that takes place, and it is a veritable cultural mourning for which the masses are joyously gathered.

And they throw themselves at it. There lies the supreme irony of Beaubourg: the masses throw themselves at it not because they salivate for that culture which they have been denied for centuries, but because they have for the first time the opportunity to massively participate in this great mourning of a culture that, in the end, they have always detested. The misunderstanding is therefore complete when one denounces Beaubourg as a cultural mystification of the masses. The masses, themselves, rush there to enjoy this execution, this dismemberment, this operational prostitution of a culture finally truly liquidated, including all counterculture that is nothing but its apotheosis. The masses rush toward Beaubourg as they rush toward disaster sites, with the same irresistible elan. Better: they are the disaster of Beaubourg. Their number, their stampede, their fascination, their itch to see everything is objectively a deadly and catastrophic behavior for the whole undertaking. Not only does their weight put the building in danger, but their adhesion, their curiosity annihilates the very contents of this culture of animation. This rush can no longer be measured against what was proposed as the cultural objective, it is its radical negation, in both its excess and success. It is thus the masses who assume the role of catastrophic agent in this structure of catastrophe, it is the masses themselves who put an end to mass culture.

Circulating in the space of transparency, the masses are certainly converted into flux, but at the same time, through their opacity and inertia, they put an end to this “polyvalent” space. One invites the masses to participate, to simulate, to play with the models – they go one better: they participate and manipulate so well that they efface all the meaning one wants to give to the operation and put the very infrastructure of the edifice in danger. Thus, always a sort of parody, a hypersimulation in response to cultural simulation, transforms the masses, who should only be the livestock of culture, into the agents of the execution of this culture, of which Beaubourg was only the shameful incarnation. One must applaud this success of cultural deterrence. All the antiartists, leftists, and those who hold culture in contempt have never even gotten close to approaching the dissuassive efficacy of this monumental black hole that is Beaubourg. It is a truly revolutionary operation, precisely because it is involuntary, insane and uncontrolled, whereas any operation meant to put an end to culture only serves, as one knows, to resurrect it.

To tell the truth, the only content of Beaubourg is the masses themselves, whom the building treats like a converter, like a black box, or, in terms of input-output, just like a refinery handles petroleum products or a flood of unprocessed material. It has never been so clear that the content – here, culture, elsewhere, information or commodities – is nothing but the phantom support for the operation of the medium itself, whose function is always to induce mass, to produce a homogeneous human and mental flux. An immense to-and-fro movement similar to that of suburban commuters, absorbed and ejected at fixed times by their workplace. And it is precisely work that is at issue here – a work of testing, polling, and directed interrogation: the people come here to select objects – responses to all the questions they might ask themselves, or rather they come themselves in response to the functional and directed question that the objects constitute. More than a chain of work it is thus a question of a programmatic discipline whose constraints have been effaced behind a veneer of tolerance. Well beyond traditional institutions of capital, the hypermarket, or the Beaubourg “hypermarket of culture,” is already the model of all future forms of controlled socialization: retotalization in a homogeneous space – time of all the dispersed functions of the body and of social life (work, leisure, media culture), retranscription of all the contradictory currents in terms of integrated circuits. Space-time of a whole operational simulation of social life. For that, the mass of consumers must be equivalent or homologous to the mass of products. It is the confrontation and the fusion of these two masses that occurs in the hypermarket as it does at Beaubourg, and that makes of them something very different from the traditional sites of culture (monuments, museums, galleries, libraries, community arts centers, etc.). Here a critical mass beyond which the commodity becomes hypercommodity and culture hyperculture, is elaborated – that is to say no longer linked to distinct exchanges or determined needs, but to a kind of total descriptive universe, or integrated circuit that implosion traverses through and through – incessant circulation of choices, readings, references, marks, decoding. Here cultural objects, as elsewhere the objects of consumption, have no other end than to maintain you in a state of mass integration, of transistorized flux, of a magnetized molecule. It is what one comes to learn in a hypermarket: hyperreality of the commodity – it is what one comes to learn at Beaubourg: the hyperreality of culture.

Already with the traditional museum this cutting up, this regrouping, this interference of all cultures, this unconditional aestheticization that constitutes the hyperreality of culture begins, but the museum is still a memory. Never, as it did here, has culture lost its memory in the service of stockpiling and functional redistribution. And this translates a more general fact: that throughout the “civilized” world the construction of stockpiles of objects has brought with it the complementary process of stockpiles of people – the line, waiting, traffic jams, concentration, the camp. That is “mass production,” not in the sense of a massive production or for use by the masses, but the production of the masses. The masses as the final product of all sociality, and, at the same time, as putting an end to sociality, because these masses that one wants us to believe are the social, are on the contrary the site of the implosion of the social. The masses are the increasingly dense sphere in which the whole social comes to be imploded, and to be devoured in an uninterrupted process of simulation.

Whence this concave mirror: it is from seeing the masses in the interior that the masses will be tempted to rush in. Typical marketing method: the whole ideology of transparency here takes on its meaning. Or again: it is in staging a reduced ideal model that one hopes for an accelerated gravitation, an automatic agglutination of culture as an automatic agglomeration of the masses. Same process: nuclear operation of a chain reaction, or specular operation of white magic.

Thus for the first time, Beaubourg is at the level of culture what the hypermarket is at the level of the commodity: the perfect circulatory operator, the demonstration of anything (commodity, culture, crowd, compressed air) through its own accelerated circulation. But if the supply of objects brings along with it the stockpiling of men, the latent violence in the supply of objects brings with it the inverse violence of men. Every stock is violent, and there is a specific violence in any mass of men also, because of the fact that it implodes – a violence proper to its gravitation, to its densification around its own locus of inertia. The masses are a locus of inertia and through that a locus of a completely new, inexplicable violence different from explosive violence. Critical mass, implosive mass. Beyond thirty thousand it poses the risk of “bending” the structure of Beaubourg. If the masses magnetized by the structure become a destructive variable of the structure itself – if those who conceived of the project wanted this (but how to hope for this?), if they thus programmed the chance of putting an end with one blow to both architecture and culture – then Beaubourg constitutes the most audacious object and the most successful happening of the century!

Make Beaubourg bend! New motto of a revolutionary order. Useless to set fire to it, useless to contest it. Do it! It is the best way of destroying it. The success of Beaubourg is no longer a mystery: the people go there for that, they throw themselves on this building, whose fragility already breathes catastrophe, with the single goal of making it bend. Certainly they obey the imperative of deterrence: one gives them an object to consume, a culture to devour, an edifice to manipulate. But at the same time they expressly aim, and without knowing it, at this annihilation. The onslaught is the only act the masses can produce as such – a projectile mass that challenges the edifice of mass culture, that wittly replies with its weight (that is to say with the characteristic most deprived of meaning, the stupidest, the least cultural one they possess) to the challenge of culturality thrown at it by Beaubourg. To the challenge of mass acculturation to a sterilized culture, the masses respond with a destructive irruption, which is prolonged in a brutal manipulation. To mental deterrence the masses respond with a direct physical deterrence. It is their own challenge. Their ruse, which is to respond in the very terms by which they are solicited, but beyond that, to respond to the simulation in which one imprisions them with an enthusiastic social process that surpasses the objectives of the former and acts as a destructive hypersimulation.*2

People have the desire to take everything, to pillage everything, to swallow everything, to manipulate everything. Seeing, deciphering, learning does not touch them. The only massive affect is that of manipulation. The organizers (and the artists and intellectuals) are frightened by this uncontrollable watchfulness, because they never count on anything but the apprenticeship of the masses to the spectacle of culture. They never count on this active, destructive fascination, a brutal and original response to the gift of an incomprehensible culture, an attraction that has all the characteristics of breaking and entering and of the violation of a sanctuary.

Beaubourg could have or should have disappeared the day after the inauguration, dismantled and kidnapped by the crowd, which would have been the only possible response to the absurd challenge of the transparency and democracy of culture – each person taking away a fetishized bolt of this culture itself fetishized.

The people come to touch, they look as if they were touching, their gaze is only an aspect of tactile manipulation. It is certainly a question of a tactile universe, no longer a visual or discursive one, and the people are directly implicated in a process: to manipulate/to be manipulated, to ventilate/to be ventilated, to circulate/to make circulate, which is no longer of the order of representation, nor of distance, nor of reflection. It is something that is part of panic, and of a world in panic.

Panic in slow motion, no external variable. It is the violence internal to a saturated ensemble. Implosion.

Beaubourg cannot even burn, everything is foreseen. Fire, explosion, destruction are no longer the imaginary alternative to this type of building. It is implosion that is the form of abolishing the “quaternary” world, both cybernetic and combinatory. Subversion, violent destruction is what corresponds to a mode of production. To a universe of networks, of combinatory theory, and of flow correspond reversal and implosion.

The same for institutions, the state, power, etc. The dream of seeing all that explode by dint of contradictions is precisely nothing but a dream. What is produced in reality is that the institutions implode of themselves, by dint of ramifications, feedback, overdeveloped control circuits. Power implodes, this is its current mode of disappearance. Such is the case for the city. Fires, war, plague, revolutions, criminal marginality, catastrophes: the whole problematic of the anticity, of the negativity internal or external to the city, has some archaic relation to its true mode of annihilation.

Even the scenario of the underground city – the Chinese version of the burial of structures – is naive. The city does not repeat itself any longer according to a schema of reproduction still dependent on the general schema of production, or according to a schema of resemblance still dependent on a schema of representation. (That is how one still restored after the Second World War.) The city no longer revives, even deep down – it is remade starting from a sort of genetic code that makes it possible to repeat it indefinitely starting with an accumulated cybernetic memory. Gone even the Borgesian Utopia, of the map coextensive with the territory and doubling it in its entirety: today the simulacrum no longer goes by way of the double and of duplication, but by way of genetic miniaturization. End of representation and implosion, there also, of the whole space in an infinitesimal memory, which forgets nothing, and which belongs to no one. Simulation of an immanent, increasingly dense, irreversible order, one that is potentially saturated and that will never again witness the liberating explosion.

We were a culture of liberating violence (rationality). Whether it be that of capital, of the liberation of productive forces, of the irreversible extension of the field of reason and of the field of value, of the conquered and colonized space including the universal – whether it be that of the revolution, which anticipates the future forms of the social and of the energy of the social – the schema is the same: that of an expanding sphere, whether through slow or violent phases, that of a liberated energy – the imaginary of radiation. The violence that accompanies it is that of a wider world: it is that of production. This violence is dialectical, energetic, cathartic. It is the one we have learned to analyze and that is familiar to us: that which traces the paths of the social and which leads to the saturation of the whole field of the social. It is a violence that is determined, analytical, liberating.

A whole other violence appears today, which we no longer know how to analyze, because it escapes the traditional schema of explosive violence: implosive violence that no longer results from the extension of a system, but from its saturation and its retraction, as is the case for physical stellar systems. A violence that follows an inordinate densifkation of the social, the state of an overregulated system, a network (of knowledge, information, power) that is overencumbered, and of a hypertrophic control investing all the interstitial pathways.

This violence is unintelligible to us because our whole imaginary has as its axis the logic of expanding systems. It is indecipherable because undetermined. Perhaps it no longer even comes from the schema of indeterminacy. Because the aleatory models that have taken over from classical models of determination and causality are not fundamentally different. They translate the passage of defined systems of expansion to systems of production and expansion on all levels – in a star or in a rhizome, it doesn’t matter – all the philosophies of the release of energy, of the irradiation of intensities and of the molecularization of desire go in the same direction, that of a saturation as far as the interstitial and the infinity of networks. The difference from the molar to the molecular is only a modulation, the last perhaps, in the fundamental energetic process of expanding systems.

Something else if we move from a millennial phase of the liberation and disconnection of energies to a phase of implosion, after a kind of maximum radiation (see Bataille’s concepts of loss and expenditure in this sense, and the solar myth of an inexhaustible radiation, on which he founds his sumptuary anthropology: it is the last explosive and radiating myth of our philosophy, the last fire of artifice of a fundamentally general economy, but this no longer has any meaning for us), to a phase of the reversion of the social – gigantic reversion of a field once the point of saturation is reached. The stellar systems also do not cease to exist once their radiating energy is dissipated: they implode according to a process that is at first slow, and then progressively accelerates – they contract at a fabulous speed, and become involutive systems, which absorb all the surrounding energies, so that they become black holes where the world as we know it, as radiation and indefinite energy potential, is abolished.

Perhaps the great metropolises – certainly these if this hypothesis has any meaning – have become sites of implosion in this sense, sites of the absorption and reabsorption of the social itself whose golden age, contemporaneous with the double concept of capital and revolution, is doubtless past. The social involutes slowly or brutally, in a field of inertia, which already envelops the political. (The opposite energy?) One must stop oneself from taking implosion for a negative process -inert, regressive – like the one language imposes on us by exalting the opposite terms of evolution, of revolution. Implosion is a process specific to incalculable consequences. May 1968 was without a doubt the first implosive episode, that is to say contrary to its rewriting in terms of revolutionary prosopopeia, a first violent reaction to the saturation of the social, a retraction, a challenge to the hegemony of the social, in contradiction, moreover, to the ideology of the participants themselves, who thought they were going further into the social – such is the imaginary that still dominates us – and moreover a good part of the events of 1968 were still able to come from that revolutionary dynamic and explosive violence, but something else began at the same time there: the violent involution of the social, determined on that score, and the consecutive and sudden implosion of power, in a brief moment of time, but that never stopped afterward – fundamentally it is that which continues, the implosion, of the social, of institutions, of power – and not at all an unlocatable revolutionary dynamic. On the contrary, revolution itself, the idea of revolution also implodes, and this implosion carries weightier consequences than the revolution itself.

Certainly, since 1968, and thanks to 1968, the social, like the desert, grows-participation, management, generalized self-management, etc. – but at the same time it comes close in multiple places, more numerous than in 1968, to its disaffection and to its total reversion. Slow seism, intelligible to historical reason

1. Technology: the desire for presence
       1.1. What is technology?
1.2. Technological desire for presence.
1.3. An ‘erotic core’ of technology?
1.4. Technological media: beyond the conscious intentions of man
1.5. Technologies as media for simulating the real and regaining enjoyment
2. Philosophy: the metaphysics of presence
2.1. Nostalgia: an analogue desire
2.2. Platonism
2.3. Modern subjectivity: the analogous representation of the world
3. Psychoanalysis: the mediation of presence
3.1. The ‘gap’ in the analogical mind
3.2.”You can’t have One without the Other”
3.3. Eros as Thanathos: Beauty as a mediator
3.4. Lacanian anthropology: beyond the need
3.5. Law and fantasy: the object a as surplus-enjoyment
3.6. Fantasy and surplus-enjoyment: between pleasure and jouissance
1. Introduction to the question of virtuality
1.1 What is virtuality: historical overview
1.2. Computer virtual reality
1.3. The real and the virtual in digital technologies: four models
2. Virtualization: from Lévy to Lacan
2.1. Characteristics of virtualization
2.2. Forces of virtualization: language, ‘law’, and technology
2.3. Language: the virtualization of the real  
2.3.1. The retroaction of ‘real time’
2.4. ‘Law’: the virtualization of ‘natural forces’
3. Interface technologies and the virtualization of the real
3.1. Technological fiction: invocational media
3.2. The digital revolution: from analogue to digital representations, from object to interface
3.3. Digitization and the mind’s schemes of representation
3.4. Computer virtual reality: from insight to liberation?
4. Interface technologies and the question of representation
4.1. Spaces of representation, or simulated spaces?
4.2. ‘On the interface of it, it seems impracticable to link sign and referent’
4.3. A mediamatic elimination of human subjectivity?  From Vorstellung to Darstellung?
4.4. Cyber-subjectivism or cyber-objectivism?
4.5. From semiotics to the subject as a mediating window
1. Fantasy as design
1.1. Design displays the central role of fantasy
1.2. The design of technological presence by means of metaphors
2. Fantasy: either ‘natural’ or ‘artificial’?
2.1. Freudian theory: fantasy appears as a ‘natural’ mediation
2.2. Fantasy as imitation: hallucinatory wishfullfilment
3. Fantasy at the interface: windows of perception
3.1. Fantasy: from lure to the condition of reality
3.2. Kantian theory: mediating sensations and reality
3.3. Freudo-Lacanian theory: desirable reality
3.3.1. Psychotherapy: transforming, not eliminating, fantasy
4. Origins of interface subjectivity
4.1. Historical sketch of the notion fantasy:  between perception and understanding
4.2. The (unconscious) productive imagination: from Kant to Freud
4.3. The origins of Freudian theory: psychical reality and the real as fantasmatic
4.4. Fantasy in Freudian psychoanalysis: beyond the opposition of  reality and illusion
5. Fantasy: the model of subjectivation
5.1. The double bind of fantasmatic identification
5.2. The computerized Self: appearance or illusion?
1. Technology and the real
1.1. Technè and tuchè: the pleasure principle and its beyond
1.2. The encounter with the real
1.3. A historical outline of the real in Lacan’s work
1.4. The real as the object of lost gratifications
1.5. Every man has his cross to bear: the real loss as trauma
1.6. Tuchè animates technè: the two-fold relation to the real of defense  and disclosure
2. The fantasy-interface as a mirror-screen
2.1. The screen and the shield
2.2. The screen as principally defensive: phobia, and its computerized treatment
3. The fantasy-interface as a window
3.1. The scheme of the veil
3.2. The unconscious fantasy
3.3. ‘Interactivity’: the screen as a window or frame
3.4. The interactive fantasy: the Self and the question of the Other
3.5. The screen and the other: computer psychotherapy
1. The ‘steersman’ and his body
1.1. Wiener and Lacan: the logic of cyborgs
1.2. Information codes and embodiment
1.2.1 Cybernetics
1.2.2. Cyberspace
2. Embodied space
2.1. The quest(ion) of space
2.2. Mirror space: the ego as a virtual unity
2.3. The optics of reflected figures: consciousness as an effect
2.4. Imaginary space interfaces man and world
2.5. Imaginary space: projecting sensations at/as the surface of the body
2.6. Avatars: engaging the body in space
2.7. Fascination: the double bind of occupying virtual space
3. Cyborg subjectivity
3.1. Emotions: a surface- and superficial thing?
3.2. Between deficiency and perfection: the never-ending promise of the cyborg
3.3. The excess of the cyborg: annihilating the threat of the real
3.4. Between exploring and dominating space
4. Third wave cybernetics
4.1 A Lacanian third wave cybernetics?
4.2. Incorporating the virtual surfaces
1. Objects of enjoyment
1.1. Techno-fetishism
1.2. The reality of pleasure: surplus-enjoyment
1.3. The perverse enjoyment of media: not the act, but the scene
1.4. The vital disavowal
1.5. Interpassivity and the technological belief
1.6. Theoretical foundations of the transition from narrative to audio-visual  culture
1.6.1. The sinthome: the glory of the mark
1.6.2. The partial objects and the cut
2. Subjectivized fantasy: identifying oneself as an object
2.1. Subjectivation: the subject as an object
2.2. Lifestyles
2.2.1. The sinthome and the body
2.2.2. The passion of the eye and the ear: ‘Encore!’
2.3. Symbols, information and commitment
2.4. Ideological interpellation in an age of information
2.5. Real identifications?
2.6. The (cyber) fantasy beyond subjectivation: false liberation
2.7. The body and the scene: subjectivity at the interface of meatspace and  cyberspace
1. The Cartesian subject of representation
1.1. Descartes, causality and imagination
1.2. The mind screening reality: Cartesian perspectivism
2. Lacan: fantasy as the ‘real stuff’ of the Cartesian subject
2.1. Lacan beyond Cartesian dualism: Cogito and libido
2.2. The unconscious (virtual) subject as a partial perspective upon the world
2.3. Fantasy as the stuff of the point of view
2.4. Lacan’s logic of visual representation
3. Fantasy as a scheme
3.1. Kant: schematism as a ‘hidden art in the depths of the human soul’
3.2. Freud on fantasy as a scheme
3.3. Lacan: fantasy as the scheme of desire
APPENDIX. Semiotics: towards the referent as a form
201. Introduction
201. ‘Mentalese’: meaning as an object in the mind
202. Ferdinand De Saussure: meaning is dependent on the sign
204. Lacan’s sequel to De Saussure
205. Summary. Three positions on the relation between sign and referent: idealism,  realism, and constructivism

Reference material

Communication Protocols and Internet Architectures (Lecture-1 vid)

GUIDE#4: π

Once, there was a red-haired man who had no eyes or ears.

He had no hair either, so he was called red-haired only theoretically (Daniil Charms)

In order to pass the Physical Fitness Test, applicants must achieve a minimum cumulative score of twelve points with at least one point in each of the four events:

  1. Maximum number of sit-ups in one minute
  2. Timed 300-meter sprint
  3. Maximum number of push-ups (untimed)
  4. Timed one and one half mile (1.5 mile) run

Scoring Scale for One-Minute Sit-Ups

Score Female Range Male Range
-2 29 and below 31 and below
0 30-34 32-37
1 35-36 38
2 37-40 39-42
3 41-42 43-44
4 43-46 45-47
5 47-48 48-49
6 49-50 50-51
7 51-52 52-53
8 53-54 54-55
9 55-56 56-57
10 57 and over 58 and over

Scoring Scale for Timed 300-Meter Sprint (in seconds)

Score Female Range Male Range
-2 67.5 and over 55.1 and over
0 67.4-65.0 55.0-52.5
1 64.9-62.5 52.4-51.1
2 62.4-60.0 51.0-49.5
3 59.9-57.5 49.4-48.0
4 57.4-56.0 47.9-46.1
5 55.9-54.0 46.0-45.0
6 53.9-53.0 44.9-44.0
7 52.9-52.0 43.9-43.0
8 51.9-51.0 42.9-42.0
9 50.9-50.0 41.9-41.0
10 49.9 and below 40.9 and below

Scoring Scale for Push-Ups (untimed)

Score Female Range Male Range
-2 4 and below 19 and below
0 5-13 20-29
1 14-18 30-32
2 19-21 33-39
3 22-26 40-43
4 27-29 44-49
5 30-32 50-53
6 33-35 54-56
7 36-38 57-60
8 39-41 61-64
9 42-44 65-70
10 45 and over 71 and over

Scoring Scale for 1.5 Mile Run (in minutes:seconds)

Score Female Range Male Range
-2 15:00 and over 13:30 and over
0 14:59-14:00 13:29-12:25
1 13:59-13:35 12:24-12:15
2 13:34-13:00 12:14-11:35
3 12:59-12:30 11:34-11:10
4 12:29-11:57 11:09-10:35
5 11:56-11:35 10:34-10:15
6 11:34-11:15 10:14-9:55
7 11:14-11:06 9:54-9:35
8 11:05-10:45 9:34-9:20
9 10:44-10:35 9:19-9:00
10 10:34 and below 8:59 and below


Apocalypse Now (1979) PosterBlack Hawk Down (2001) PosterGhost Dog: The Way of the Samurai (1999) Poster

Apocalypse Now  Black Hawk Down Ghost Dog The Way of the Samurai  Thug Life in D.C.

(cam / takeover / fully approved&operational / barbed wire 1984 ctrl-alt-del)

OpenSource Watson

Shatterring illusions, disturbing complacency and sending them on their way greatly changed people

GUIDE#3: cinema

Sympathy For The Devil

Moving Image Archive

Prelinger Archives

Lobster Films

UbuWeb: Film & Video / Destino

AFA Anthology Film Archives International Center 32 Second Avenue (212) 505-5181

Essential Cinema Repertory

Человек с киноаппаратом/The Man with the Movie Camera (1929) (Dziga Vertov)

The Last Days and Moments of Jack Smith / at large

Jonas Mekas

Frederick Wiseman

SVA Film&Literature

The Film-Makers’ Co-Op

MNN Manhattan Neighborhood Network Production Training

BCAT Media Education Center/BRIC Arts Media Education

Film&Tv Production Resources – / PA ProductionTraining Program / CLCasting Networks, Inc

Mayor’s Office of Film, Theatre & Broadcasting: REEL-NYC

Radioman Production Hotline Update / fbDoc

Prisoner’s Cinema | Phosphene | Dream Machine

Slightly Out Of Focus: Capa In Color

Комната, где жил Булгаков

Free OpenLearn courses

Please allow me to introduce myself
I’m a man of wealth and taste
I’ve been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man’s soul and faith
And I was ’round when Jesus Christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game
I stuck around St. Petersburg
When I saw it was a time for a change
Killed the czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain
I rode a tank
Held a general’s rank
When the blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
Ah, what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
I watched with glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the gods they made
I shouted out,
“Who killed the Kennedys?”
When after all
It was you and me
Let me please introduce myself
I’m a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah, get down, baby
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what’s confusing you
Is just the nature of my game
Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails
Just call me Lucifer
Cause I’m in need of some restraint
So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politesse
Or I’ll lay your soul to waste, um yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, um yeah
But what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, um mean it, get down
Woo, who
Oh yeah, get on down
Oh yeah
Oh yeah!
Tell me baby, what’s my name
Tell me honey, can ya guess my name
Tell me baby, what’s my name
I tell you one time, you’re to blame
Ooo, who
Ooo, who
Ooo, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Oh, yeah
What’s me name
Tell me, baby, what’s my name
Tell me, sweetie, what’s my name
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Oh, yeah

GUIDE#2: language / read my lips

Advertising Lullaby

Quality, value, style, service, selection, convenience
Economy, savings, performance, experience, hospitality
Low rates, friendly service, name brands, easy terms
Affordable prices, money-back guarantee.
Free installation, free admission, free appraisal, free alterations,
Free delivery, free estimates, free home trial, and free parking.
No cash?No problem!No kidding!No fuss, no muss,
No risk, no obligation, no red tape, no down payment,
No entry fee, no hidden charges, no purchase necessary,
No one will call on you, no payments or interest till September.
Limited time only, though, so act now, order today, send no money,
Offer good while supplies last, two to a customer, each item sold separately,
Batteries not included, mileage may vary, all sales are final,
Allow six weeks for delivery, some items not available,
Some assembly required, some restrictions may apply.
So come on in for a free demonstration and a free consultation
with our friendly, professional staff.Our experienced and
knowledgeable sales representatives will help you make a
selection that’s just right for you and just right for your budget.
And say, don’t forget to pick up your free gift: a classic deluxe
custom designer luxury prestige high-quality premium select
gourmet pocket pencil sharpener.Yours for the asking,
no purchase necessary.It’s our way of saying thank you.
And if you act now, we’ll include an extra added free complimentary
bonus gift at no cost to you: a classic deluxe custom designer
luxury prestige high-quality premium select gourmet combination
key ring, magnifying glass, and garden hose, in a genuine
imitation leather-style carrying case with authentic vinyl trim.
Yours for the asking, no purchase necessary.It’s our way of
saying thank you.
Actually, it’s our way of saying ‘Bend over just a little farther
so we can stick this big advertising dick up your ass a little bit
deeper, a little bit deeper, a little bit DEEPER, you miserable
no-good dumbass fucking consumer!’




In 1964 Joseph Weizenbaum took a position at MIT. In 1966, he published a comparatively simple program called ELIZA, named after the ingenue in George Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion, which performed natural language processing. Driven by a script named DOCTOR, it was capable of engaging humans in a conversation which bore a striking resemblance to one with an empathic psychologist. Weizenbaum modeled its conversational style after Carl Rogers, who introduced the use of open-ended questions to encourage patients to communicate more effectively with therapists. The program applied pattern matching rules to statements to figure out its replies. (Programs like this are now called chatterbots.) It is considered the forerunner of thinking machines. Weizenbaum was shocked that his program was taken seriously by many users, who would open their hearts to it. Famously, when observing his secretary using the software – who was aware that it was a simulation – she asked Weizenbaum: “would you mind leaving the room please?”. He started to think philosophically about the implications of artificial intelligence and later became one of its leading critics.

NLP: Natural Language Processing 


The Chaos

Gerard Nolst Trenité (1922)

Dearest creature in creation
Studying English pronunciation,
   I will teach you in my verse
   Sounds like corpse, corps, horse and worse.

I will keep you, Susy, busy,
Make your head with heat grow dizzy;
   Tear in eye, your dress you’ll tear;
   Queer, fair seer, hear my prayer.

Pray, console your loving poet,
Make my coat look new, dear, sew it!
   Just compare heart, hear and heard,
   Dies and diet, lord and word.

Sword and sward, retain and Britain
(Mind the latter how it’s written).
   Made has not the sound of bade,
   Saysaid, paypaid, laid but plaid.

Now I surely will not plague you
With such words as vague and ague,
   But be careful how you speak,
   Say: gush, bush, steak, streak, break, bleak ,

Previous, precious, fuchsia, via
Recipe, pipe, studding-sail, choir;
   Woven, oven, how and low,
   Script, receipt, shoe, poem, toe.

Say, expecting fraud and trickery:
Daughter, laughter and Terpsichore,
   Branch, ranch, measles, topsails, aisles,
   Missiles, similes, reviles.

Wholly, holly, signal, signing,
Same, examining, but mining,
   Scholar, vicar, and cigar,
   Solar, mica, war and far.

From “desire”: desirableadmirable from “admire”,
Lumber, plumber, bier, but brier,
   Topsham, brougham, renown, but known,
   Knowledge, done, lone, gone, none, tone,

One, anemone, Balmoral,
Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel.
   Gertrude, German, wind and wind,
   Beau, kind, kindred, queue, mankind,

Tortoise, turquoise, chamois-leather,
Reading, Reading, heathen, heather.
   This phonetic labyrinth
   Gives moss, gross, brook, brooch, ninth, plinth.

Have you ever yet endeavoured
To pronounce revered and severed,
   Demon, lemon, ghoul, foul, soul,
   Peter, petrol and patrol?

Billet does not end like ballet;
Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet.
   Blood and flood are not like food,
   Nor is mould like should and would.

Banquet is not nearly parquet,
Which exactly rhymes with khaki.
   Discount, viscount, load and broad,
   Toward, to forward, to reward,

Ricocheted and crocheting, croquet?
Right! Your pronunciation’s OK.
   Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve,
   Friend and fiend, alive and live.

Is your r correct in higher?
Keats asserts it rhymes Thalia.
   Hugh, but hug, and hood, but hoot,
   Buoyant, minute, but minute.

Say abscission with precision,
Now: position and transition;
   Would it tally with my rhyme
   If I mentioned paradigm?

Twopence, threepence, tease are easy,
But cease, crease, grease and greasy?
   Cornice, nice, valise, revise,
   Rabies, but lullabies.

Of such puzzling words as nauseous,
Rhyming well with cautious, tortious,
   You’ll envelop lists, I hope,
   In a linen envelope.

Would you like some more? You’ll have it!
Affidavit, David, davit.
   To abjure, to perjure. Sheik
   Does not sound like Czech but ache.

Liberty, library, heave and heaven,
Rachel, loch, moustache, eleven.
   We say hallowed, but allowed,
   People, leopard, towed but vowed.

Mark the difference, moreover,
Between mover, plover, Dover.
   Leeches, breeches, wise, precise,
   Chalice, but police and lice,

Camel, constable, unstable,
Principle, disciple, label.
   Petal, penal, and canal,
   Wait, surmise, plait, promise, pal,

Suit, suite, ruin. Circuit, conduit
Rhyme with “shirk it” and “beyond it”,
   But it is not hard to tell
   Why it’s pall, mall, but Pall Mall.

Muscle, muscular, gaol, iron,
Timber, climber, bullion, lion,
   Worm and storm, chaise, chaos, chair,
   Senator, spectator, mayor,

Ivy, privy, famous; clamour
Has the a of drachm and hammer.
   Pussy, hussy and possess,
   Desert, but desert, address.

Golf, wolf, countenance, lieutenants
Hoist in lieu of flags left pennants.
   Courier, courtier, tomb, bomb, comb,
   Cow, but Cowper, some and home.

Solder, soldier! Blood is thicker“,
Quoth he, “than liqueur or liquor“,
   Making, it is sad but true,
   In bravado, much ado.

Stranger does not rhyme with anger,
Neither does devour with clangour.
   Pilot, pivot, gaunt, but aunt,
   Font, front, wont, want, grand and grant.

Arsenic, specific, scenic,
Relic, rhetoric, hygienic.
   Gooseberry, goose, and close, but close,
   Paradise, rise, rose, and dose.

Say inveigh, neigh, but inveigle,
Make the latter rhyme with eagle.
   Mind! Meandering but mean,
   Valentine and magazine.

And I bet you, dear, a penny,
You say mani-(fold) like many,
   Which is wrong. Say rapier, pier,
   Tier (one who ties), but tier.

Arch, archangel; pray, does erring
Rhyme with herring or with stirring?
   Prison, bison, treasure trove,
   Treason, hover, cover, cove,

Perseverance, severance. Ribald
Rhymes (but piebald doesn’t) with nibbled.
   Phaeton, paean, gnat, ghat, gnaw,
   Lien, psychic, shone, bone, pshaw.

Don’t be down, my own, but rough it,
And distinguish buffet, buffet;
   Brood, stood, roof, rook, school, wool, boon,
   Worcester, Boleyn, to impugn.

Say in sounds correct and sterling
Hearse, hear, hearken, year and yearling.
   Evil, devil, mezzotint,
   Mind the z! (A gentle hint.)

Now you need not pay attention
To such sounds as I don’t mention,
   Sounds like pores, pause, pours and paws,
   Rhyming with the pronoun yours;

Nor are proper names included,
Though I often heard, as you did,
   Funny rhymes to unicorn,
   Yes, you know them, Vaughan and Strachan.

No, my maiden, coy and comely,
I don’t want to speak of Cholmondeley.
   No. Yet Froude compared with proud
   Is no better than McLeod.

But mind trivial and vial,
Tripod, menial, denial,
   Troll and trolley, realm and ream,
   Schedule, mischief, schism, and scheme.

Argil, gill, Argyll, gill. Surely
May be made to rhyme with Raleigh,
   But you’re not supposed to say
   Piquet rhymes with sobriquet.

Had this invalid invalid
Worthless documents? How pallid,
   How uncouth he, couchant, looked,
   When for Portsmouth I had booked!

Zeus, Thebes, Thales, Aphrodite,
Paramour, enamoured, flighty,
   Episodes, antipodes,
   Acquiesce, and obsequies.

Please don’t monkey with the geyser,
Don’t peel ‘taters with my razor,
   Rather say in accents pure:
   Nature, stature and mature.

Pious, impious, limb, climb, glumly,
Worsted, worsted, crumbly, dumbly,
   Conquer, conquest, vase, phase, fan,
   Wan, sedan and artisan.

The th will surely trouble you
More than r, ch or w.
   Say then these phonetic gems:
   Thomas, thyme, Theresa, Thames.

Thompson, Chatham, Waltham, Streatham,
There are more but I forget ’em
   Wait! I’ve got it: Anthony,
   Lighten your anxiety.

The archaic word albeit
Does not rhyme with eight-you see it;
   With and forthwith, one has voice,
   One has not, you make your choice.

Shoes, goes, does *. Now first say: finger;
Then say: singer, ginger, linger.
   Real, zeal, mauve, gauze and gauge,
   Marriage, foliage, mirage, age,

Hero, heron, query, very,
Parry, tarry fury, bury,
   Dost, lost, post, and doth, cloth, loth,
   Job, Job, blossom, bosom, oath.

Faugh, oppugnant, keen oppugners,
Bowing, bowing, banjo-tuners
   Holm you know, but noes, canoes,
   Puisne, truism, use, to use?

Though the difference seems little,
We say actual, but victual,
   Seat, sweat, chaste, caste, Leigh, eight, height,
   Put, nut, granite, and unite.

Reefer does not rhyme with deafer,
Feoffer does, and zephyr, heifer.
   Dull, bull, Geoffrey, George, ate, late,
   Hint, pint, senate, but sedate.

Gaelic, Arabic, pacific,
Science, conscience, scientific;
   Tour, but our, dour, succour, four,
   Gas, alas, and Arkansas.

Say manoeuvre, yacht and vomit,
Next omit, which differs from it
   Bona fide, alibi
   Gyrate, dowry and awry.

Sea, idea, guinea, area,
Psalm, Maria, but malaria.
   Youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean,
   Doctrine, turpentine, marine.

Compare alien with Italian,
Dandelion with battalion,
   Rally with ally; yea, ye,
   Eye, I, ay, aye, whey, key, quay!

Say aver, but ever, fever,
Neither, leisure, skein, receiver.
   Never guess-it is not safe,
   We say calves, valves, half, but Ralf.

Starry, granary, canary,
Crevice, but device, and eyrie,
   Face, but preface, then grimace,
   Phlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass.

Bass, large, target, gin, give, verging,
Ought, oust, joust, and scour, but scourging;
   Ear, but earn; and ere and tear
   Do not rhyme with here but heir.

Mind the o of off and often
Which may be pronounced as orphan,
   With the sound of saw and sauce;
   Also soft, lost, cloth and cross.

Pudding, puddle, putting. Putting?
Yes: at golf it rhymes with shutting.
   Respite, spite, consent, resent.
   Liable, but Parliament.

Seven is right, but so is even,
Hyphen, roughen, nephew, Stephen,
   Monkey, donkey, clerk and jerk,
   Asp, grasp, wasp, demesne, cork, work.

A of valour, vapid vapour,
S of news (compare newspaper),
   G of gibbet, gibbon, gist,
   I of antichrist and grist,

Differ like diverse and divers,
Rivers, strivers, shivers, fivers.
   Once, but nonce, toll, doll, but roll,
   Polish, Polish, poll and poll.

Pronunciation-think of Psyche!-
Is a paling, stout and spiky.
   Won’t it make you lose your wits
   Writing groats and saying “grits”?

It’s a dark abyss or tunnel
Strewn with stones like rowlock, gunwale,
   Islington, and Isle of Wight,
   Housewife, verdict and indict.

Don’t you think so, reader, rather,
Saying lather, bather, father?
   Finally, which rhymes with enough,
   Though, through, bough, cough, hough, sough, tough??

Hiccough has the sound of sup
My advice is: GIVE IT UP!



Ivan Gevirtz (Coding Standards) | Heather Harde (CrunchBase) Michael Arrington | company profiles: TechCrunch | Gina (Ning) | LL () – EH – ZDTV – E H – TechTV – TechTV (CP) – TWit (fb)

Basic Must-have skills expectations

1. BILINGUAL TYPYING (Baby Type 2.0)
3. Take a PUBLIC SPEAKING course (The Song of Hiawatha / pdf / fundamentals / for beginners / spoken impact)


*The Speed Reading Monster Course

Speed Reading Techniques 

Iris. Reading at the Speed of Thought

How to Test Your Reading Speed

Speed Reading Exercises

Speed Reading Tutorial (1/8) – Introduction

Speed Reading Tutorial (2/8) – How fast do you read?

Speed Reading Tutorial (3/8) – Three Old Reading Habits

Speed Reading Tutorial (6/8) – Reading Faster

Speed Reading Tutorial (8/8) – Comprehensive Classes

Free Speed Reading Course (1/5)

Free Speed Reading Course (2/5)

Free Speed Reading Course (3/5)

Free Speed Reading Course (4/5)

Free Speed Reading Course (5/5)

Free Speed Reading Software – Firefox Add On (RSVP Reader)

Speed Reading 101 – Free Speed Reading Class (1/4)

Speed Reading 101 – Free Speed Reading Class (2/4)

Speed Reading 101 – Free Speed Reading Class (3/4)

Speed Reading 101 – Free Speed Reading Class (4/4)




Oracle DB Database Design / Oracle Design Intro / Oracle-11g

Lecture: HTTP

Lecture: PHP

Lecture: XML / MVC

Lecture: SQL

Lecture: JavaScript

Lecture: Ajax

Lecture: Security

Lecture: Scalability


OpenLearn Catalog / English requirements

Intensive Introduction to Computer Science (Introduction-Source code-Functions-Linear Search-Structures-Debugging-Linked lists-Valgrind-DOM-Preprocessing-Enterprise architectures)

COMPUTER SCIENCE COURSE: BITS (what is information/bits reductionism-the explosion/exponential growth-the internet/the web-privacy-surveillance-search-encryption-copyright-censorship-laws&regulations-radio&tv)

COMPUTER SCIENCE: programming, web development, software engineering, theory


empowering people to improve their lives / video lectures | videos 4teaching




ONLINE COURSES: UdacityVirtual ProfessorsWebinarsComputer Science 101 / SEE-Stanford Engineering Everywhere – Engineering LAB1 / Cryptography-1 / Cryptography-2 / CSupcoming in-session

WHITE PAPERS / FORUMmailing list

RESEARCH AREAS: AI / Information SystemsGraphics/HCIComputer Systems / Theory


2. Harvard University – F/W GENIUS / edX / uDemy

ONLINE COURSES / Building Dynamic Websites

WHITE PAPERS / InnovationLab

Economics and Computation (Website / Lecture-1 vid)

Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science /  Web GIS: Principles and Applications /

Mobile Operating Systems and Applications (Lecture-1 vid)

Quantitative Reasoning: Practical Math (Lecture-1 vid)

3. Princeton University – F/W GENIUS / COURSERA-PRINCETON

ONLINE COURSES / ClassCentral 


4. Yale University – F/W GENIUS / COURSERA-YALE



5. Columbia University – F/W GENIUS / COURSERA-COLUMBIA

ONLINE COURSES / Previews / Video archives / Youtube playlists

WHITE PAPERS / Research without borders

6. University of Pennsylvania F/W GENIUS / COURSERA-UPENN / iTunes

ONLINE COURSES | OpenForum / Youtube playlists

WHITE PAPERS / Research news




8. UCLA University of California Los Angeles F/W GENIUS / BruinCast

ONLINE COURSES / Youtube playlists / Virtual Professors


9. CAMBRIDGE University / iTunes

ONLINE COURSESSemantic WebDesign



10. Brown University – F/W GENIUSCOURSERA-BROWN

ONLINE COURSES / Youtube Playlists

WHITE PAPERS / Watson Institute / Research

11. Cornell University F/W GENIUS

ONLINE COURSES  / ClassCentral eCornell Leadership / fb / Youtube playlists


12. Dartmouth College – F/W GENIUS 

ONLINE COURSES / Media LibraryYoutube playlists

WHITE PAPERS / cabby podcast

13. M.I.T. Massachusetts Institute of Technology – edX – F/W GENIUS


WHITE PAPERS (OpenCourseware) / Intelligent WebDesignInterface Design / ELIZAREBEL @WORK (Joseph Weizenbaum eventually became a “preacher”, strictly demanding responsibility of each individual scientist, condemning war and arguing that mankind have become insane.)

GUIDE#1: walking tours

The Man 2014

The Song of Hiawatha

Free Walking Tours Calendar: NYC (YouTube)



REACH / (MTA / vid / NPRJanney website)(58k, 750x562)<br><b>Country:</b> United States<br><b>City:</b> New York<br><b>System:</b> New York City Transit<br><b>Line:</b> BMT Broadway Line<br><b>Location:</b> 34th Street/Herald Square <br><b>Car:</b> R-46 (Pullman-Standard, 1974-75) 5529 <br><b>Photo by:</b> Robbie Rosenfeld<br><b>Date:</b> 5/2005<br><b>Artwork:</b> <i>REACH New York, An Urban Musical Instrument</i>, Christopher Janney (1996).<br><b>Viewed (this week/total):</b> 5 / 6714



Access Control Systems & Methodology
- Access Control Basics
- Advanced Access Control
- Access Control Administration
- Security Models
- Authentication (free video!)
- Access Control Methods
- Access Attacks
- Penetration Testing

Telecommunications & Network Security
- OSI Model
- Secure Topology
- IP Security
- Remote Access
- Network Security Devices
- Network Security Protocols
- WAN Technologies
- Security Techniques
- Email Security
- Phone Security
- Security Controls
- Web Vulnerabilities
- Physical Media

Security Management Practices
- Security Management Concepts
- Security Policy
- Protection Mechanisms
- Change Control
- Data Classification
- Risk Management
- Wireless Security
- Roles and Responsibilities
- Security Awareness/Mgt

Applications & Systems Development Security
- Database Basics
- Database Concepts
- Data Storage
- Artificial Intelligence
- System Development Lifecycle
- Security Control Architecture
- Computer Design
- Malicious Code Basics
- Malicious Code Advanced
- Web Enhancements
- Application & System Attacks (free video!)

- Cryptography Basics
- Cryptography Algorithms
- Cryptography Strength
- Key Management
- Message Authentication
- Secret Key
- Public Key
- Cryptography Attacks

Security Architecture & Models
- Computer Processing
- Security Architecture Concepts
- Evaluation Criteria
- Security Model Principles
- Trusted Computing Base
- Security Model Threats

Operations Security
- Administrative Management
- Anti-Virus Management
- Sensitive Information Handling
- Control Types
- Machine Types
- Resource Protection
- Auditing
- Audit Trails
- Monitoring
- Intrusion Detection
- Negative Actions

Business Continuity Planning
- Business Continuity
- Information System Backups
- Availability
- Recovery Techniques
- Emergency Response

 Physical Security 
- Facility Requirements 
- Environmental Safety 
- Physical Threats

Laws, Investigations, & Ethics
- Types of Laws
- Information Security Laws
- Investigations
- Evidence
- Computer Crime
- Incident Handling
- Ethics





DAILY EVENTS @New Yorkled Magazine / Village Voice Events Caledar

National Map

GEOGRAPHY 101states-capitals
usa major cities map
usa divisions
EST Eastern Time Zone/Eastern Standard Time
CST Central Time Zone/Central Standard Time (-1hr EST)
MST Mountain Time Zone/Mountain Standard Time (-2hr EST)
PST Pacific Time Zone/Pacific Standard Time (-3hr EST)
AKST Alaskan Time Zone/Alaskan Standard Time (-4hr EST)
HST Hawaiian Time Zone/Hawaii-Aleutian Standard Time (-6hr EST)
usa divisions

USA Political-Geographic Divisions (Quizzes / Flags / Nicknames / Abbreviations / Political Science /Printouts )


Rivers in North America, North American Rivers, Major Rivers in Canada, US Rivers

BrazosThis Texas river begins in the northern part of the state in Stonewall County, and flows southeast into Brazoria County and the Gulf of Mexico. It’s (840 miles) (1,351 km) in length.Churchill: This river of central Canada rises in northwestern Saskatchewan, then flows east into Manitoba, and on into Hudson Bay. It passes through numerous lakes and is known for the rapids along its path. It’s (1,000 miles) (1,609 km) in length.

Columbia: This wide, fast-flowing river begins in the Canadian Rockies of southeast British Columbia, Canada, flowing south through the State of Washington, then forming the natural border between Washington and Oregon. It ends in the Pacific Ocean and is (1,152 miles) (1,857 km) in length. Hydroelectric power development in the river basin brought inexpensive electricity to the Pacific Northwest, but it severely affected salmon spawning and local fish migration.

Fraser: This river of British Columbia, Canada, begins in the Canadian Rockies near Yellowhead Pass, then flows in a variety of directions (generally south), finally turning west to empty into the Strait of Georgia, just south of Vancouver. It’s (850 miles) (1,368 km) in length.Mackenzie: It’s the longest river in Canada and dissects the Northwest Territories. It flows generally northwest into Mackenzie Bay and the Beaufort Sea. This historic river was discovered by Sir Alexander MacKenzie, and along its path are thick, green forests and dozens of major lakes. It’s (1,200 miles) (1,800 km) in length. If then combined with its tributaries – the Slave, Peace and Finlay rivers – it extends to (2,635 miles) (4,240 km), and becomes the second longest river in North America, second only to the Mississippi/Missouri river system combination at (3,877 miles) (6,236 km) in length.

Mississippi: It is the major river of North America and the United States at (2,339 miles) (3,765 km) in length. It flows from northwestern Minnesota south to the Gulf of Mexico, just below the city of New Orleans. It is a significant transportation artery and when combined with its major tributaries (the Missouri and Ohio rivers) it becomes the third largest river system in the world at (3,877 miles) (6,236 km) in length.

Missouri: It begins in southern Montana in the Rocky Mountains, first flowing north then generally southeast across the heart of the United States, ending at the Mississippi River, just to the north of St. Louis, Missouri. It is the longest river in the United States (2,500 miles) (4,023 km).

OhioFormed by the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the Ohio flows generally southwest. It forms the natural borders of Ohio and West Virginia, Ohio and Kentucky, as well as parts of the borders of Indiana, Illinois and Kentucky. It empties into the Mississippi River at the Illinois border and is (975 miles) (1,569 km) long.

Yukon: It begins in the southwestern edge of the Yukon Territory of Canada, and then flows northwest across the border into Alaska. This massive river continues southwest across central Alaska, ending at the Bering Sea. Even at a length of (1,265 miles) (2.035 km), most of it is navigable, however, it remains frozen from October through mid-June. 

Colorado: Beginning in the Rocky Mountains of northern Colorado, it moves southwest, ending in the Gulf of California. It’s (1,450 miles) (2,333 km) in length and over the centuries formed numerous canyons along its winding path. The most famous of these is the Grand Canyon in northern Arizona. The river has more than 30 electric power plants along its run, as well as dozens of dams and reservoirs.

Rio Grande: It is one of the longest rivers in North America at (1,885 miles) (3,034 km). It begins in the San Juan Mountains of southern Colorado, then flows south through New Mexico. It forms the natural border between Texas and the country of Mexico as it flows southeast to the Gulf of Mexico. In Mexico it is known as Rio Bravo del Norte. Used for drinking water by both countries, the river is becoming more polluted as population centers that dot the river grow in size, and then dump sewage and pesticides into the water.St. Lawrence: This river flows northeast out of Lake Ontario and on into the Gulf of St. Lawrence. It’s (760 miles) (1,225 km) in length and permits the passage of deep-water ships between the Atlantic Ocean and the Great Lakes. It includes a series of man-made canals, locks and dams, and is considered one of the most vital shipping routes on the planet.

GUIDE-007: semantic web

SymSys Symbolic Systems

Symbolic Systems - Stanford


SYMSYS 100. Minds and Machines. 4 Units.

An overview of the interdisciplinary study of cognition, information, communication, and language, with an emphasis on foundational issues: What are minds? What is computation? What are rationality and intelligence? Can we predict human behavior? Can computers be truly intelligent? How do people and technology interact, and how might they do so in the future? Lectures focus on how the methods of philosophy, mathematics, empirical research, and computational modeling are used to study minds and machines. Undergraduates considering a major in symbolic systems should take this course as early as possible in their program of study.
Same as: LINGUIST 144, PHIL 99, PSYCH 35.

SYMSYS 122. Artificial Intelligence: Philosophy, Ethics, & Impact. 3-4 Units.

Recent advances in computing may place us at the threshold of a unique turning point in human history. Soon we are likely to entrust management of our environment, economy, security, infrastructure, food production, healthcare, and to a large degree even our personal activities, to artificially intelligent computer systems. The prospect of “turning over the keys” to increasingly autonomous systems raises many complex and troubling questions. How will society respond as versatile robots and machine-learning systems displace an ever-expanding spectrum of blue- and white-collar workers? Will the benefits of this technological revolution be broadly distributed or accrue to a lucky few? How can we ensure that these systems respect our ethical principles when they make decisions at speeds and for rationales that exceed our ability to comprehend? What, if any, legal rights and responsibilities should we grant them? And should we regard them merely as sophisticated tools or as a newly emerging form of life? The goal of this course is to equip students with the intellectual tools, ethical foundation, and psychological framework to successfully navigate the coming age of intelligent machines.
Same as: CS 122.

SYMSYS 130. Research Methods in the Cognitive and Information Sciences. 3 Units.

Understanding the different methodological approaches used in disciplines that study cognition and information. Emphasis is on philosophical/analytical, formal/mathematical, empirical, and computational thinking styles, with some attention to other methods as well. What assumptions underlie these methods? How can they be combined? How do practitioners of each discipline think differently about problems, and what are the challenges involved in studying or working across them?.


A weekly seminar allowing students the opportunity to discuss and explore cryptocurrencies from a variety of domains and view points:nn1) Explore the history of fiat currencies, both economically and philosophically. How does Bitcoin mesh in here? What are advantages and disadvantages compared to traditional fiat currencies? (~2 weeks) n2) Contextualize and juxtapose decentralized currencies with respect to TCP/IP, Napster, and other relevant decentralized and cloud protocols. (~2 weeks)n3) Work through and understand Satoshi¿s initial protocol and proof-of-work mining system. What problem did she solve? How? Why was it important? How can we prove it mathematically? What are significant game theoretic and cryptographic weaknesses? What do alternative cryptocurrencies look like? Is there a `best¿ alternative? (~3 weeks)n4) What does ¿Bitcoin as a protocol¿ mean? What can be built on top of it? What¿s being built around it? What does regulation look like? What are hypotheses for the future of digital currencies? How do we explain investor confidence, given regulatory hesitation? (~3 weeks).

SYMSYS 170. Decision Behavior: Theory and Evidence. 3-4 Units.

Introduction to the study of judgment and decision making, relating theory and evidence from disciplines such as psychology, economics, statistics, neuroscience, and philosophy. The development and critique of Homo economicus as a model of human behavior, and more recent theories based on empirical findings. Recommended: background in formal reasoning.
Same as: SYMSYS 270.

SYMSYS 190. Senior Honors Tutorial. 1-5 Unit.

Under the supervision of their faculty honors adviser, students work on their senior honors project. May be repeated for credit.

SYMSYS 191. Senior Honors Seminar. 1 Unit.

Recommended for seniors doing an honors project. Under the leadership of the Symbolic Systems program coordinator, students discuss, and present their honors project.

SYMSYS 196. Independent Study. 1-15 Unit.

Independent work under the supervision of a faculty member. Can be repeated for credit.

SYMSYS 200. Symbolic Systems in Practice. 2-3 Units.

Applying a Symbolic Systems education at Stanford and outside. The basics of research and practice. Students develop and present a project, and investigate different career paths, including academic, industrial, professional, and public service, through interviews with alumni.

SYMSYS 201. ICT, Society, and Democracy. 3 Units.

The impact of information and communication technologies on social and political life. Interdisciplinary. Classic and contemporary readings focusing on topics such as social networks, virtual versus face-to-face communication, the public sphere, voting technology, and collaborative production.

SYMSYS 204. Philosophy of Linguistics. 4 Units.

Philosophical issues raised by contemporary work in linguistics. Topics include: the subject matter of linguistics (especially internalism vs. externalism), methodology and data (especially the role of quantitative methods and the reliance on intuitions), the relationship between language and thought (varieties of Whorfianism and anti-Whorfianism), nativist arguments about language acquisition, and language evolution.
Same as: LINGUIST 204, PHIL 369.

SYMSYS 206. Philosophy of Neuroscience. 4 Units.

Can problems of mind be solved by understanding the brain, or models of the brain? The views of philosophers and neuroscientists who believe so, and others who are skeptical of neurophilosophical approaches to the mind. Historical and recent literature in philosophy and neuroscience. Topics may include perception, memory, neural accounts of consciousness, neurophenomenology, neuroscience and physics, computational models, and eliminativism.
Same as: PHIL 167D, PHIL 267D.

SYMSYS 209. Battles Over Bits. 3 Units.

The changing nature of information in the Internet age and its relationship to human behavior. Philosophical assumptions underlying practices such as open source software development, file sharing, common carriage, and community wireless networks, contrasted with arguments for protecting private and commercial interests such as software patents, copy protection, copyright infringement lawsuits, and regulatory barriers. Theory and evidence from disciplines including psychology, economics, computer science, law, and political science. Prerequisite: PSYCH 40, 55, 70, or SYMBSYS 202.

SYMSYS 210. Learning Facial Emotions: Art and Psychology. 3 Units.

Artistic and psychological learning approaches for emotion recognition from facial expressions. The advantages of learning by image-based microexpressions, subtle expressions, macro expressions, art drawing and actor mimicry when there are cognitive deficits due to conditions such as autism. Comparative analysis uses brain studies, learning theory, and human-computer interaction. Studio component conveys the artistic and psychological approaches. Prerequisites: PSYCH 1, SYMSYS 100 or consent of instructor. Go to to sign up for a Permission Number.

SYMSYS 211. Learning Facial Emotions: Art, Psychology, Human-Computer Interaction. 3 Units.

Learning to recognize facial emotions by drawing a live model versus the psychology method of using classified images of subtle and micro expressions. Dimensions of analysis include cognitive modeling and neuroscience. The design of human-computer interaction systems for people with cognitive deficits such as autism and Aspergers, which integrate the art and psychology approaches using methods such as robot heads, avatars, and facial recognition software. Prerequisites: PSYCH 1 or consent of instructor.

SYMSYS 245. Cognition in Interaction Design. 3 Units.

Note: Same course as 145 which is no longer active. Interactive systems from the standpoint of human cognition. Topics include skill acquisition, complex learning, reasoning, language, perception, methods in usability testing, special computational techniques such as intelligent and adaptive interfaces, and design for people with cognitive disabilities. Students conduct analyses of real world problems of their own choosing and redesign/analyze a project of an interactive system. Limited enrollment seminar taught in two sections of approximatly ten students each. Admission to the course is by application to the instructor, with preference given to Symbolic Systems students of advanced standing. Recommended: a course in cognitive psychology or cognitive anthropology.”.

SYMSYS 255. Building Digital History: Social Movements and Protest at Stanford. 3-5 Units.

A project-based course focused on developing a collaborative history website based on oral and archival history research. Thematic focus is the history of student activism at Stanford. How have political activities such as demonstrations, assemblies, educational events, and nonviolent civil disobedience been organized on campus, and how have they affected Stanford? What lessons can be drawn from the past for students interested in social change? Students will choose historical periods and/or specific social movements for research. Course will feature guest appearances by representatives from a range of social movements at Stanford the past fifty years, and the building of an online repository and community for the collaborative representation and discussion of history.

SYMSYS 255A. Building Digital History: Social Movements and Protest at Stanford. 1 Unit.

Lectures-only version of SYMSYS 255.

SYMSYS 270. Decision Behavior: Theory and Evidence. 3-4 Units.

Introduction to the study of judgment and decision making, relating theory and evidence from disciplines such as psychology, economics, statistics, neuroscience, and philosophy. The development and critique of Homo economicus as a model of human behavior, and more recent theories based on empirical findings. Recommended: background in formal reasoning.
Same as: SYMSYS 170.

SYMSYS 280. Symbolic Systems Research Seminar. 1 Unit.

A mixture of public lectures of interest to Symbolic Systems students (the Symbolic Systems Forum) and student-led meetings to discuss research in Symbolic Systems. Can be repeated for credit. Open to both undergraduates and Master’s students.

SYMSYS 290. Master’s Degree Project. 1-15 Unit.

SYMSYS 291. Master’s Program Seminar. 1 Unit.

Enrollment limited to students in the Symbolic Systems M.S. degree program. May be repeated for credit.

SYMSYS 296. Independent Study. 1-15 Unit.

Independent work under the supervision of a faculty member. Can be repeated for credit.

SYMSYS 298. Peer Advising in Symbolic Systems: Practicum. 1 Unit.

Optional for students selected as Undergraduate Advising Fellows in the Symbolic Systems Program. AFs work with program administrators to assist undergraduates in the Symbolic Systems major or minor, in course selection, degree planning, and relating the curriculum to a career or life plan, through advising and events. Meeting with all AFs for an hour once per week under the direction of the Associate Director. Requires a short reflective paper at the end of the quarter on what the AF has learned about advising students in the program. Repeatable for credit. May not be taken by students who receive monetary compensation for their work as an AF.

SYMSYS 299. Curricular Practical Training. 1 Unit.

Students obtain employment in a relevant research or industrial activity to enhance their professional experience consistent with their degree programs. Meets the requirements for curricular practical training for students on F-1 visas. Students submit a concise report detailing work activities, problems worked on, and key results. May be repeated for credit. Prerequisite: qualified offer of employment and consent of advisor.

  1. Submission to the Symbolic Systems Program office and approval of the following pre-project research documents:
    1. Project Area Statement, endorsed with a commitment from a student’s prospective project adviser no later than May 1 of the academic year prior to the expected graduation year; and
    2. Qualifying Research Paper due no later than the end of the Summer Quarter prior to the expected graduation year.
  2. Completion of a coherent plan of study, to be approved by the Graduate Studies Director in consultation with the student’s adviser and designed to support a student’s project. An initial plan of study should be delineated on the Program Proposal Form prior to the end of the student’s first quarter of study, to be modified at the time of the Project Area Statement with the approval of a student’s adviser and the Graduate Studies Director. The final version of the Program Proposal, which should specify all the courses the student has taken and proposes as fulfillment of the unit requirements for the degree, is due by the end of Finals Week in the quarter prior to the student’s expected graduation quarter (i.e. end of Winter Quarter for a student graduating in the Spring). The plan of study must include courses more advanced than the Symbolic Systems undergraduate core in four main skill areas: formal, empirical, computational, and philosophical; and in at least three of the following departments: Computer Science, Linguistics, Philosophy, and Psychology. More advanced courses in each of the skill areas are defined as follows:

a) formal: a course in logic and computational theory beyond the level of PHIL 151 First-Order Logic. The courses below have been approved. Other courses may be approved if appropriate.

b) empirical: a course drawing on experimental or observational data or methods, beyond the level of Psych 55, Ling 120, or Ling 130A. The courses below are examples of those that have been approved. Other courses may be approved if appropriate.

c) computational: a course involving programming beyond the level of CS 107. The courses below have been approved. Other courses may be approved if appropriate.

  • CS 108 Object-Oriented Systems Design
  • CS 110 Principles of Computer Systems
  • CS 124 From Languages to Information
  • CS 142 Web Applications
  • CS 143 Compilers
  • CS 148 Introduction to Computer Graphics and Imaging
  • CS 193R
  • CS 193S
  • CS 221 Artificial Intelligence: Principles and Techniques
  • CS 224N Natural Language Processing
  • CS 224W Social and Information Networks
  • CS 249A Object-Oriented Programming from a Modeling and Simulation Perspective

d) philosophical: a course in the area of Philosophy of Mind/Language/Science/’Epistemology or Metaphysics at the 200 level or above, certified by the instructor as worthy of graduate credit. The courses below are examples of those that have been approved. Other courses may be approved if appropriate.

3. Completion of three quarters of SYMSYS 291 Master’s Program Seminar.

4. Completion of a substantial project appropriate to the program plan, represented by the M.S. Thesis, the last of the the M.S research documents. The project normally takes three quarters, and work on the project may account for up to 15 units of a student’s program. The thesis must be read and approved for the master’s degree in Symbolic Systems by two qualified readers approved by the program, at least one of whom must be a member of the academic council. A copy of the thesis must be submitted (in both print and electronic forms) to the Associate Director of Symbolic Systems, with the print version including the signatures of each reader indicating approval of the thesis for the degree of Master of Science, no later than 5 pm on the last day of finals week in the quarter of a student’s graduation.

AI Artificial Intelligence Concentration [br-AI-n]

For this concentration, students must take CS 221 to satisfy the core AI requirement. In addition, they must complete a total of six courses from the following list, including at least three of the courses marked in *boldface with surrounding asterisks* (drawn from at least two areas):

    1. Knowledge representation and reasoning: Logic and Automated Reasoning (CS 157); *Rational Agency and Intelligent Interaction (CS 222/Phil 358)*; *Reasoning Methods in AI (CS 227)*; *Structured Probabilistic Models: Principles and Techniques (CS 228)*; Formal Methods for Reactive Systems (CS 256); Modal Logic (Phil 154).
    2. Natural language processing: *Natural-Language Processing (CS 224N/Linguist 280)* or From Languages to Information (CS 124/Linguist 180) (but not both); *Speech Recognition and Synthesis (CS 224S/Linguist 285)*; *Natural Language Understanding (CS 224U/Linguist 188/288)*.
    3. Learning: *Machine Learning (CS 229)*; Approximate Dynamic Programming (MS&E 339); Modern Applied Statistics: Learning (Stat 315A); Modern Applied Statistics: Data Mining (Stat 315B).
    4. Robotics and vision: *Introduction to Robotics (CS 223A)*; *Introduction to Computer Vision (CS 223B)*; Experimental Robotics (CS 225A); Robot Programming Laboratory (CS 225B); *Statistical Techniques in Robotics (CS 226)*, *Motion Planning (CS 326A)*.
    5. Additional topics: *Multi-agent Systems (CS 224M)*; General Game Playing (CS 227B); Topics in Artificial Intelligence (CS 329) [with approval of advisor]; Introduction to Biomedical Informatics: Fundamental Methods (CS 270/Biomedin 210); Introduction to Biomedical Informatics: Biomedical Systems Engineering (CS 271/Biomedin 211); Representations and Algorithms for Computational Molecular Biology (CS 274/BioE 214/Biomedin 214/Gene 214); Phenomenological Foundations of Cognition, Language, and Computation (CS 378).
    6. Mathematical foundations: Game Theory and Economic Applications (Econ 160); Introduction to Linear Dynamic Systems (EE 263); Convex Optimization (EE 364A/B); Information Theory (EE 376A/B); Computability and Logic (Phil 152) [if not taken for the core]; Stochastic Decision Models (MS&E 251); Introduction to Control Design Techniques (Engr 205); Analysis and Control of Nonlinear Systems (Engr 209A); Linear Algebra and Matrix Theory (Math 113); Mathematical Methods for Robotics, Vision, and Graphics (CS205A); Introduction to Automata and Complexity Theory (CS154) [if not taken for the core].



Abstract: The Uncertain Life of the Quantum Monad by James Morris.
The human ability to create art poses a problem for artificial intelligence. Can computers create art? The study analyses the creative process, contrasts this to computerized systems, then argues that no current computer can replicate this process. Discussing current artificial intelligence research, the study questions whether future theories could derive more creative computing, but concludes that our lack of understanding of ourselves will always leave something indefinable.


If this doesn’t terrify you…

Google’s computers OUTWIT their humans

‘Deep learning’ clusters crack coding problems their top engineers can’t

Analysis Google no longer understands how its “deep learning” decision-making computer systems have made themselves so good at recognizing things in photos.

This means the internet giant may need fewer experts in future as it can instead rely on its semi-autonomous, semi-smart machines to solve problems all on their own.

The claims were made at the Machine Learning Conference in San Francisco on Friday by Google software engineer Quoc V. Le in a talk in which he outlined some of the ways the content-slurper is putting “deep learning” systems to work. (You find out more about machine learning, a computer science research topic,here [PDF].)

“Deep learning” involves large clusters of computers ingesting and automatically classifying data, such as things in pictures. Google uses the technology for services such as Android’s voice-controlled search, image recognition, and Google translate.

The ad-slinger’s deep learning experiments caused a stir in June 2012 when a front-page New York Times article revealed that after Google fed its “DistBelief” technology with millions of YouTube videos, the software had learned to recognize the key features of cats.

A feline detector may sound trivial, but it’s the sort of digital brain-power needed to identify house numbers for Street View photos, individual faces on websites, or, say,<SKYNET DISCLAIMER> if Google ever needs to identify rebel human forces creeping through the smoking ruins of a bombed-out Silicon Valley </SKYNET DISCLAIMER>.

Google’s deep-learning tech works in a hierarchical way, so the bottom-most layer of the neural network can detect changes in color in an image’s pixels, and then the layer above may be able to use that to recognize certain types of edges. After adding successive analysis layers, different branches of the system can develop detection methods for faces, rocking chairs, computers, and so on.

What stunned Quoc V. Le is that the software has learned to pick out features in things like paper shredders that people can’t easily spot – you’ve seen one shredder, you’ve seen them all, practically. But not so for Google’s monster.

Learning “how to engineer features to recognize that that’s a shredder – that’s very complicated,” he explained. “I spent a lot of thoughts on it and couldn’t do it.”

It started with a GIF: Image recognition paves way for greater things

Many of Quoc’s pals had trouble identifying paper shredders when he showed them pictures of the machines, he said. The computer system has a greater success rate, and he isn’t quite sure how he could write program to do this.

At this point in the presentation another Googler who was sitting next to our humbleEl Reg hack burst out laughing, gasping: “Wow.”

“We had to rely on data to engineer the features for us, rather than engineer the features ourselves,” Quoc explained.

This means that for some things, Google researchers can no longer explain exactly how the system has learned to spot certain objects, because the programming appears to think independently from its creators, and its complex cognitive processes are inscrutable. This “thinking” is within an extremely narrow remit, but it is demonstrably effective and independently verifiable.

Google doesn’t expect its deep-learning systems to ever evolve into a full-blown emergent artificial intelligence, though. “[AI] just happens on its own? I’m too practical – we have to make it happen,” the company’s research chief Alfred Spector told us earlier this year.

Google’s AI chief Peter Norvig believes the kinds of statistical data-heavy models used by Google represent the world’s best hope to crack tough problems such as reliable speech recognition and understanding – a contentious opinion, and one that clashes with Noam Chomsky’s view.

Deep learning is attractive to Google because it can solve problems the company’s own researchers can’t, and it can let the company hire fewer inefficient meatsackshuman experts. And Google is known for hiring the best of the best.

By ceding advanced capabilities to its machines, Google can save on human headcount, better grow its systems to deal with a data deluge, and develop capabilities that have – so far – befuddled engineers.

The advertising giant has pioneered a similar approach of delegating certain decisions and decision-making selection systems with its Borg and Omega cluster managers, which seem to behave like “living things” in how they allocate workloads.

Given Google’s ambition to “organize the world’s information”, the fewer people it needs to employ, the better. By developing these “deep learning” systems Google needs to employ fewer human experts, Quoc, said.

“Machine learning can be difficult because it turns out that even though in theory you could use logistic regression and so on, but in practice what happens is we spend a lot of time on data processing inventing features and so on. For every single problem we have to hire domain experts,” he added.

“We want to move beyond that … there are certainly problems we can’t engineer features of and we want machines to do that.”

By working hard to give its machines greater capabilities, and local, limited intelligence, Google can crack classification problems that its human experts can’t solve. Skynet? No. Rise of the savant-like machines? Yes. But for now the relationship is, thankfully, cooperative.

By Jack Clark

RESEARCH AREAS: AI / Information SystemsComputer Systems / Theory

Intelligent Machines

ELIZA – A Computer Program for the Study of Natural Language Communication between Man and Machine

BRAIN and SPACE / Behavioral Neuroscience / Clinical Psychology

Data Mining | Data Structures and Algorithms (Website / Lecture-1 vid) | Big Data Analytics (Lecture-1 vid)

Brain Teasers