Andy Carvin's Waste of Bandwidth

Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak and deCODE Genetics CEO Kari Stefensson

Today’s plenary panel session at the MIT Technology Review conference brought together a diverse group of inventors to talk about emerging technologies that will change the world. First we heard from Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple. Woz gave an animated talk about the importance of simplicity in new technologies.

“We all want computers to be simple,” he said, but software keeps getting more and more complicated, which in turn discourages us from learning new programs. In other words, why move on to the next generation of software when you’re just getting comfortable with the last generation?

“When I was young, I had a great transistor radio, and it was neat and easy, and it was portable,” he said, describing an ideally simple technology. “And all my life I’ve favored products that came in that category…. I just don’t like products that are – ugh! – rigid and fixed. If you can’t throw it out the window, don’t trust it.”

For Wozniak, his own easy-going personality made a significant impact on his approach to building new technologies. “Being lazy was one of the keys in all of my [computer] designs,” he explained. Use less parts, keep it simple. And if you can cut down on the number of parts in an invention, “maybe you can create something that the masses can afford and use.”

When he and Steve Jobs were developing the first Apple computers, he realized that computers had to be affordable if they were to stimulate the market. So designing them as elegantly and efficiently as possible made good business sense. “That’s where the cutting of parts and of chips came in,” he said. “So it was trying to think out the whole product and the whole price. Every cent you save is another cent of profit you can make.”

Woz noted that simplifying and streamlining processes applies to ICT services as well. He marveled at Philadelphia’s plans to connect the entire city with wireless Internet access. “Oh my gosh!” he exclaimed. “You take out all the accounting procedures, you can cut the cost of it per person down to nothing, making it really efficient. If only the government could do that!”

Wrapping up his talk with comments on the role of technology in education, he said, “We’ve got a lot of computers being used, but it’s more important to inspire the kid than deliver the right content. And the more human a computer seems, the more it attracts kids. But true artificial intelligence in educational software in which a program *really* understands a kid’s personality is a long way off.”

Following Woz’s remarks, Kari Stefansson of deCODE Genetics talked about his company’s ambitious, effort to collect DNA samples from all of Iceland to develop a new generation of pharmaceuticals.

“I come from a family of storytellers,” Stefansson began. “My father was a writer, my grandfather a storyteller. And if you look at human genetics, you get to pry into the history of man. And one of the basic instruments we’re using is the genealogy of the nation. We have the genealogy of the entire nation going back 1100 years in time.”

Beyond the medical advancements that could be achieved through such an effort, Stefansson was able to use the DNA data to confirm the oral traditions regarding Iceland’s collective family tree. “There was a book written 1000 years ago called the Book of Settlement, in which the Vikings and their slaves settled down into Iceland,” he explained. Based on their DNA sampling, they discovered that about 75% of the Y chromosome DNA samples – the DNA passed down from father to son – indeed contained Norwegian origins. Additionally, when they examined the nation’s mitochondrial DNA – passed down from mother to child – the results suggested many of Iceland’s ancestral mothers came from the British Isles. “So when the Vikings went to England, took all of their pretty women and brought them to Iceland.”

Returning to the topic of how his work relates to medical innovation, Stefansson continued, “The basic unit of all life isn’t an atom or a molecule. It’s bits of information written in G’s and T’s and A’s and C’s”: the four protein combinations that string together in a helix to form our DNA. By analyzing the DNA of the entire nation of Iceland, deCODE Genetics has begun to test several new drugs that specifically work to address illnesses, like heart disease, that can be passed down from parent to child.

“We have isolated quite a few genes predisposed to common diseases,” he said. “We isolated a gene that’s connected to myocardial infraction.” They’re now in the second phase of a clinical trial of a medicine based on this information.

“Genetics hold certain promise,” he concluded. “It will change the way we do medicine.”

——–

“We are in the golden age of invention,” began Edward Jung of Intellectual Ventures. “From the inventor’s perspective, this is a great time to be an inventor.” Most people, he said, think of the 20th century as the golden age of invention, particularly due to the advances in science and biology, and the change in markets that allowed companies to embrace innovation rapidly. “But the need for invention hasn’t diminished; in fact it’s increased.”

“You can look any one of those [inventions] that happened over the last 100 years, and now they’re changing fundamentally,” he continued. “Cameras, radio, surgery, cars, transistors, airplanes, are all going through monumental change due to the fast pace of innovation. But now the ability to innovate goes beyond where most companies are willing to take risks,” which leaves the inventors to take the lead.

A new generation of invention is taking hold worldwide, Jung said. “I’m amazed about the unprecedented freedom in the ability to innovate.” For example, after decades of stifling intellectual creativity, China is now booming with innovation.

“Bringing a product to market is much more efficient now than it was 50 or 100 years ago.” With the new generation of inventors, “Companies will find it hard to contain them.” The Dean Kamens of the world are able to bring their ideas to market by attracting their own financing directly, becoming entrepreneurs in their own right.

“When you have a lot of invention going on, you really have to go about encouraging invention as well: to inspire them to invent and take risk… To dare to dream big…”

The session concluded with a presentation by J. Craig Venter, president of the Center for the Advancement of Genomics. Genome sequencing has revolutionized biology in ways that were previously thought impossible, he explained. “When I was doing my graduate work, I was told it’d be difficult to do anything new in biology, since everything we needed to know was already known,” Venter said. Apparently, his professors never imagined the scientific tidal wave in DNA research that would become known as genomics.

Advances in technology, along with the ever-decreasing cost of DNA sequencing, have allowed genomic research to progress at a furious pace. “I spent 10 years trying to find one gene, and now we have systems in which we can discover hundreds of thousands of genes an hour, millions a day,” Venter continued. “It’s only nine years since we sequenced the first genome, yet we’re now seeing a continuous exponential expansion…. We’ve done hundreds of genomes, from plants, to insects, the dog genome.. ..This is continuing to go on.”

His latest venture is the Ocean Microbial Genomic Survey (http://www.sorcerer2expedition.org), a scientific maritime adventure following the path of Charles Darwin’s ship around the world, surveying microbes in the water every 200 miles. The survey has been an equal mix of scientific discovery and political wrangling, as they’ve had to negotiate with national governments just to be allowed to take barrels of ocean water in their sovereign waters. This proved to be a major challenge in the Caribbean, where various nations claim overlapping sovereignty over particular stretches of ocean. “Because we’ve found so many genes, all these countries want to file patents on them, because they think they’ll find some value.”

To date, this research has surveyed 2.5 billion base pairs of DNA, equaling five million new genes from 7,000 species. Now, their expedition has arrived in Australia and is headed to Africa by way of the Indian Ocean.

Venter’s work has already reached the point where they can create artificial single-cell organisms. Soon they’ll be able to create multi-cell species. The fiction of Jurassic Park may not be so fictional after all – though Venter said such advances should be applied to preserving endangered species rather than reviving long-lost ones.

“Biology and computing will start to merge,” Venter concluded. “In the future we’ll design computers in which their design is driven by biology and DNA.”

IBM Vice President Nick Donofrio (left) and Georgia Tech President G. Wayne Clough (right)

The opening session of day two of the MIT Technology Review conference, Georgia Tech President G. Wayne Clough and IBM Vice President Nick Donofrio gave a joint talk on the National Innovation Initiative, sponsored by the National Council on Competitiveness.

Formed in the mid 1980s, the council works to promote policies to encourage economic competitiveness. The council is comprised of 15 leaders from industry and academia, with approximately 200 experts advising them. “If the US is going to maintain its edge,” he said, “it needs to rethink its assets…. Today we have nothing we can take for granted… We need to look for new ways of doing business. We need to make sure that good companies seeking to build good jobs in the US… are given the tools to compete.”

“Innovation occurs at the intersection of invention and insight. It’s about the application of invention – the fusion of new developments and new approaches to solve problems,” Clough continued, quoting co-chair Sam Palmisano.

Describing the work of the council, Clough explained, “The objective is to build an actionable agenda that can be enacted over the next few years that will make a difference… no matter who is elected in the upcoming election…. ” Additionally, “Our products must have access to international markets in a fair way” as other countries introduce their own innovations. And it’s not just a matter of building our economy at the expense of other nations. “For the US to succeed… other countries have to be winners as well,” he noted.

Nick Donofrio of IBM took the stage following Clough’s remarks. “It’s really a unique time for the United States,” he said. “I think you need to put that in context; many countries around the world are working very hard on innovation.” The Netherlands, China and Australia, to name a few, have put forward aggressive initiatives to foster innovation. “We’re seeing challenges emerging from developing countries, from India and China, and from a resurging European Union. …It’s not just a cyclical change.”

“They are quickly replicating the historical advantages that have made the United States a place of innovation,” Donofrio continued. According to research commissioned by IBM, 91 million jobs will be created globally over the next 10 years, with 5.4million created this year; for the US, this will translate to 19.4 million jobs.

“But the question Americans are asking is where these jobs will be…. Many Americans see outsourcing as a threat, not as an opportunity.” Donofrio, however, offered a more positive outlook. “Every nation and every region will choose its own path and all of us will have a stake in the outcome. … Global prosperity will bring stability.” He continued, “How can we in the United States complain about other countries striving to raise the standard of living for their own people? We should be cheering them on.”

Donofrio noted that it’s common in policy discourse to confuse the roles of innovation and invention in our economy. “Innovation in this context, is not necessarily invention… Invention is the creation of something that did not exist before – a new thought, a new technology, a new idea. But how many of those inventions truly make a difference in our lives. Invention does not guarantee value. It is the application of invention… to solve real problems. That is the strength of invention.”

“By the nature of innovation in the 21st century, we have a new thought,” he continued. Today’s model is a dynamic one. In the past we built to forecast demand. To day we must work to build on-demand. We have to think in an interdepartmental, collaborative way… across boundaries, finding intersections between them: how can I make a product better? What does the customer value most? What features will spawn new value down the road?”

“We must approach innovation in terms of customer value… Do we have the right methods of bringing partnerships together? Are we investing in the physical sciences? Do we have the right policies? Are we encouraging governments around the world to embrace open standards? Are we protecting our intellectual property while at the same time promote collaboration and open standards? It is imperative for the nations of the world to develop a cohesive strategy for innovation.”

In order for the US to maintain and increase its competitiveness, the US must do more to encourage young people to pursue studies in science, technology, engineering and math. Despite the fact that science and technology has always played a great role in country’s economy, college students’ interest in the sciences has either stayed flat or even declined. We must develop a new generation of young people with a range of skills, both technical and nontechnical. “One certainty is that the innovators of the future are those who will bridge the gaps between innovation, business and human relations.” Many of these new leaders, he said, will come from the US, but that does not mean we should discourage leadership coming from abroad. “We want to benefit from the diversity of talent from all over the world… The fact of the matter is that smart people live all over the world.”

Regarding federal investment in innovation, Donofrio asked, “Is government investing in the industries and disciplines… or is it locked in supporting antiquated industries, stifling innovation and development?” To succeed, he explained, we must work to make sure that the government stays ahead of the curve and recognizes the need to implement policies to foster growing industries and invest in new research areas.

“We want, as a team, to apply innovation to America’s greatest challenges and opportunities, whether its energy, education, healthcare or how we grow new markets,” he concluded. “The responsibility, for all of us, must be shared: by business, by academia, by the public sector…. We need to make innovation is at the heart of the national agenda.”

It’s 8am right now at MIT’s Kresge Auditorium; in 30 minutes or so, the second day of the MIT Technology Review will commence. I’m settling into the auditorium, front and center – mainly for the access to the electricity outlets at the bottom of the stage rather than for the stellar view. Conference attendees are slowly settling into their seats, wiping that last crumb of blueberry scone from their chin and getting a quick skim of their newspaper.

Behind the curtain on a stage, a piano tech slowly works his way up the scale of the keyboard, tuning each key for a performance that will take place at the end of the day.

“I thought I was at a tech conference, not a Ligeti performance,” said a British gentleman sitting next to me.

“Isn’t John Cage dead?” another Brit behind me said a moment or two later. (I was tempted to make a reference to Bartok’s Music For Strings, Percussion & Celesta but I bit my tongue, deciding this little 20th century classical music trivia contest must come to an end before someone got hurt.)

We’ve got an interesting day ahead of us. First, we‚ll hear from the president of Georgia Tech University, who will discuss the National Council on Competitiveness‚ National Innovation Initiative. Following that, General Motors Chairman and CEO Richard Wagoner will give today’s keynote. Personally, I’m most excited about a roundtable discussion entitled “Emerging Technologies that Will Change the World: The Inventor View.” Among the experts appearing during that panel are Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Computer and Wheels of Zeus; Kari Stefansson of Iceland’s deCODE Genetics; and J. Craig Ventner of the Center for the Advancement of Genomics. Given my lifelong love affair with Apple (not to mention admiration for Woz’s work in the classroom) and keen interest in genetics, I’ve got high hopes for that session.

Interesting news from the folks who run the Creative Commons initiative: they’ve just announced a Developing Nations Copyright License that can be used by content developers to encourage free use of their content in the developing world. As I reported last December from the World Summit on the Information Society, Lawrence Lessig and his colleagues have been developing this idea “so content may be tagged as being freely available for people in the developing world.” Thanks to the work of Jamie Love, they now have the first release of the license, which became available last week.

So what’s the big deal about this copyright license stuff? Well, it’s a big deal to two groups of people: people who create content and people who want to use content. For people who create content, copyright licenses are a way of protecting their work, making sure that the work is used in ways that are acceptable to them — picture songwriters, authors, filmmakers, bloggers, anyone who likes to follow their creative muse. And for people who want to use content – pretty much everyone in the known universe — a copyright license tells them when they’re using someone’s content in a fair, reasonable way. So if I’m a guy creating a website about dolphins and I find a nice picture of a bottlenose dolphin in someone’s website, the polite thing to do would be to find out from them if I’ve got permission to use it. Not to mention the fact I could get sued if I took the picture from someone who sells pictures of dolphins for a living.

Creative Commons makes all of this easier by creating a user-friendly way for content producers to assign a copyright license to their work. For example, if you look on the left-hand side of my blog’s homepage, you’ll see a button saying that my blog is published under a Creative Commons license that allows anyone to republish my stuff as long as it’s for noncommercial purposes and that they pass along the same copyright privileges I’ve set up for myself. Anyone who’s got content they’d like to share publicly while preserving their ownership of it can go to Creativecommons.org and design a license for themselves — a bit of computer code they insert on their website. Once you’ve placed it on your website, everyone who visits your site will have access to an easy-to-read explanation of the license, plus a legal deed written for all you lawyers out there. Even better, the computer code added to the Web page means that your license can be read by search engines and the like, so they’ll note the copyright status for your content.

So now comes along this new Developing Nations license. What this license means is that you, as a content producer, can differentiate how your content gets used by others based on whether they live in a developed or developing country. By creating a Developing Nations license for your website — or for your video, song, photo collection, what have you — you grant anyone living in one of the qualifying countries the right to copy, distribute, display and perform your work, as well as make derivative works (ie, works based on your original content), as long as they give you credit for the work, and pass along the same license rules if they redistribute it. So if a person from Uganda visits your website, they can use this license to copy your work freely, redistribute it, etc, while someone from the United States would need to get your permission first.

I’ve been wondering since last December when this new license would come out, and am really curious to see how it gets used. Will content owners embrace the idea? Will Internet users in less-developed countries take advantage of it? In some of the discussions on the Creative Commons website, some people have described the idea as “paternalistic” and “throwing scraps to those third world types…” Others are cynical from the perspective that people with Internet access in the developing world are already “elites” within their nations and don’t need this kind of assistance. I think these positions insult both the thousands of people who use Creative Commons licenses and don’t see their work as “scraps,” and are eager to work with people from the rest of the world who have an interest in accessing a greater diversity of knowledge and creating new knowledge in the process.

Perhaps I’m just being naive, but I’m hopeful about this new license. Only time will tell to see if it’s used in ways that are truly beneficial to promoting knowledge sharing and development.

Meanwhile, below is a list of countries that don’t qualify for getting access to content through the Developing Nations license:

Andorra, Aruba, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Belgium, Bermuda, Brunei, Canada, Cayman Islands, Channel Islands, Cyprus, Denmark, Faeroe Islands, Finland, France, French Polynesia, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Greenland, Guam, Iceland, Ireland, Isle of Man, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macao, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, Netherlands
Antilles, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Qatar, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, US Virgin Islands

The list comes from the World Bank’s list of high-income economies, which the Creative Commons folks are using as the basis for saying who can’t take advantage of the license. If you’re residing in any other country not listed here, you can take advantage of the rights defined by the Developing Nations License.

Have any interesting examples of how this license might be put to good use? I’d love to hear about it…. -andy