Super Sad True Love Story by Gary Shteyngart

This is the first Sci-fi I have read that take on the decline on the US though the “entertainment”/connectivity development we see now. It is also a good example on how people see China as the "threat" that are beyond the control of anything the US can do, as US is not really bringing anything of value anymore. The part where US wants to impress the visiting person (the head of China's Central Bank and "probably the most powerful person on the planet") by showing that the US can still innovate is brilliant.

In many ways this is for me the Bukowski version of Daemon (the brilliant book by Daniel Suarez that everyone interesting in technology should read). The need to stay connected and the focus on instant gratification is not very sophisticated but therefore also very effective. Letting all (almost) key characters be outside the main events in society is and efficient way to create the feeling of lost control that seem to drive many today into situations where they work without much reflection or thought about any broader consequences of their actions. His main character is such a sad person that it is hard not to see him as the perfect caricature of a US "intellectual" today.

Sometimes it feels a little to much focus on sex/nudity, but then you relies that this is where we are heading if media/PR/TV continue on the path we are on today and have been since mass marketing begun. I hope people doing advertising, developing apps and are innovative in the use of new media read this and think a little about where things are heading… Maybe even take the time to read Simmel, The Philosophy of Money.

Education for sustainability in the 21st century

What is smart and sustainable education in the 21st century? This is one of the key challenges today. Instead of asking how ICT can be used in schools, the salary level of teachers and similar marginal questions we should ask what education is in the 21st century. The two key questions are:
1. What do we need to learn?
2. How can we learn? (using new technology and solutions)

The first question is very interesting as we are moving into a society where changes are happening so fast and where science is no longer even close to intuitive (quantum mechanics, nanotechnology, data processing, genetic manipulation, etc) that it will be challenging to guide the development with current democratic institutions (or non democratic institutions in some cases). It is also important as access to data and connectivity make interpretation of data rather than memorizing data more important in many cases. A geopolitical shift make cultural understanding of countries like China and India more important in the western curriculum.

The second question is equally interesting and related. When we can get access to information and explanations by the world’s best teachers though mobile devices what is the role of the “industrial school” (presented in an entertaining way here by Ken Robinson) and how can we focus on education/learning rather than an institution with limited relevance in the 21st century. Distant education has a great potential to lead the discussion, but so far they have often used traditional education as the benchmark instead of developing new innovative approaches to education. Will this change?

A first step could be to develop a ranking/rating system of current education. What are the best approaches/contributions to sustainable development and how can it be measured.

Realize that I’ve over the three last weeks discussed the issue of education and innovation three times in three different processes. At EDEN (Annual Conference – Learning and Sustainability: The New Ecosystem of Innovation and Knowledge) and at a pan EU university project and today I could not avoid it during a (video) discussion about ICT and sustainability during an event in Almedalen.

Education for sustainability in the 21st century

What is smart and sustainable education in the 21st century? This is one of the key challenges today. Instead of asking how ICT can be used in schools, the salary level of teachers and similar marginal questions we should ask what education is in the 21st century. The two key questions are:
1. What do we need to learn?
2. How can we learn? (using new technology and solutions)

The first question is very interesting as we are moving into a society where changes are happening so fast and where science is no longer even close to intuitive (quantum mechanics, nanotechnology, data processing, genetic manipulation, etc) that it will be challenging to guide the development with current democratic institutions (or non democratic institutions in some cases). It is also important as access to data and connectivity make interpretation of data rather than memorizing data more important in many cases. A geopolitical shift make cultural understanding of countries like China and India more important in the western curriculum.

The second question is equally interesting and related. When we can get access to information and explanations by the world’s best teachers though mobile devices what is the role of the “industrial school” (presented in an entertaining way here by Ken Robinson) and how can we focus on education/learning rather than an institution with limited relevance in the 21st century. Distant education has a great potential to lead the discussion, but so far they have often used traditional education as the benchmark instead of developing new innovative approaches to education. Will this change?

A first step could be to develop a ranking/rating system of current education. What are the best approaches/contributions to sustainable development and how can it be measured.

Realize that I’ve over the three last weeks discussed the issue of education and innovation three times in three different processes. At EDEN (Annual Conference – Learning and Sustainability: The New Ecosystem of Innovation and Knowledge) and at a pan EU university project and today I could not avoid it during a (video) discussion about ICT and sustainability during an event in Almedalen.

Immortality by Kevin Bohacz

Immortality is not a bad book, for two evenings of reading it is more than OK. But as many other scifi's I think it ends where it should begin. The merging of man/machine, or upgrade to "human 2.0" is happening now and we need authors to explore the ethical and aesthetic aspects of what is happening.

1. We have close to 2 billion people with overweight,
2. close to a billion people chronically hungry,
3. at the same time as we are killing the planet,
4. we can see the end of the western dominance and
5. the (re-)emergence of other values beside the linear/growth paradigm that has dominated the leading institutions thinking about development.

For each there is a challenge for "transhumanism"
1. Will it only accelerate the need for "more" and individualism (the book and many others highlight the connectivity as a potential force for transformative change)?
2. Is the development helping those in most need of help? The book does not even mention the poor on the planet... and hardly anyone outside the US...
3. How will it help up live more sustainable lives? Here the book highlights current challenges (and actually make them a key part of the plot), but does not talk about actual solutions.
4. China, India and other re-emerging economies will set the agenda in a way that never has been the case though history. It is time for the western civilization to leave room for other cultures, if not we will have "war" in a few decades where the reality and current institutions drift too far apart. Nothing in the book discussed these issues.
5. There is so much focus on the technical development that the ethical aspects are often forgotten. Right when the book end the people of the world face some interesting choices and ethical dilemmas.

Part of me also feel a little uncomfortable with an average book that use the same title as Kundera's masterpiece.

Immortality by Kevin Bohacz

Immortality is not a bad book, for two evenings of reading it is more than OK. But as many other scifi's I think it ends where it should begin. The merging of man/machine, or upgrade to "human 2.0" is happening now and we need authors to explore the ethical and aesthetic aspects of what is happening.

1. We have close to 2 billion people with overweight,
2. close to a billion people chronically hungry,
3. at the same time as we are killing the planet,
4. we can see the end of the western dominance and
5. the (re-)emergence of other values beside the linear/growth paradigm that has dominated the leading institutions thinking about development.

For each there is a challenge for "transhumanism"
1. Will it only accelerate the need for "more" and individualism (the book and many others highlight the connectivity as a potential force for transformative change)?
2. Is the development helping those in most need of help? The book does not even mention the poor on the planet... and hardly anyone outside the US...
3. How will it help up live more sustainable lives? Here the book highlights current challenges (and actually make them a key part of the plot), but does not talk about actual solutions.
4. China, India and other re-emerging economies will set the agenda in a way that never has been the case though history. It is time for the western civilization to leave room for other cultures, if not we will have "war" in a few decades where the reality and current institutions drift too far apart. Nothing in the book discussed these issues.
5. There is so much focus on the technical development that the ethical aspects are often forgotten. Right when the book end the people of the world face some interesting choices and ethical dilemmas.

Part of me also feel a little uncomfortable with an average book that use the same title as Kundera's masterpiece.