Recent Updates Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • daviding 4:33 pm on December 30, 2015 Permalink | Reply  

    Configured Epson Workforce WF-3640 All-in-One Printer for Ubuntu Linux 12.04 (and 14.04). From Synaptic Package Manager, installed printer-driver-escpr, then selected driver for Epson Workforce 545 with option for the Epson driver (not the CUPS driver). After installing printer on USB cable, repeated for IPP network printer via DNS-SD. On Ubuntu 14.04, the “Choose Driver” finds a “Downloadable Driver” for epson-escpr and installs from Seiko Epson Corporation as free software. Epson scanner plugged with USB cable works fine with XSane application, just as it had with the Canon MP450 it replaced.

     
  • daviding 8:29 am on December 23, 2015 Permalink | Reply  

    Discovered Kyoichi Jim Kijima 2015 @SpringerJapan article “Translational and Trans-disciplinary Approach to Service Systems” cites Ing (2012) as “Science, systems thinking, and advances in theories, methods and practices”.  The more formal citation should have been in 2013 to “Rethinking Systems Thinking: Learning and Coevolving with the World”, in Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Volume 30, Number 5, (October 2013) pp. 527-547 at doi:10.1002/sres.2229 [or see the preprint]. Lags between blogging, sharing in the research community, and publishing.

     
  • daviding 1:48 pm on December 20, 2015 Permalink | Reply  

    Thinkpad Yoga 260 is the first credible descendant of @Lenovo #Thinkpad X230T, with Wacom digitizer and socketed (not soldered) RAM. May not be able to get both i7 and 16GB RAM, due to current Intel Skylake incompatibilities. Experiences with Ubuntu Linux on X230T (and prospects for Yoga 260) discussed at https://www.reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/3whtbg/thinkpad_yoga_260_linux_vs_samsung_galaxy_note/ .

     
  • daviding 2:25 pm on December 7, 2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    “A Project Language”, “A Center Language” 

    “A Project Language” and “A Center Language” as derived from “A Pattern Language” from Christopher Alexander. Thesis paper by Hajo Neis in 2010, with presentation slides (partially in German).

    In earlier projects, patterns were used and applied in the original format and formulation of APL (i.e. Oregon Campus, Peru Housing, Multicenter New York, etc). A additional set of new patterns was created for each project. Because of the need for a more direct participatory process combined with lack of time and money, in many cases patterns and pattern languages took on a simpler format (i.e. Eishin Campus Japan). Also advances in theoretical understanding have modified the pattern approach itself.

    Here, a key notion is that of adaptation in the design and building process for architecture and the built environment. The idea of adaptation originated in biology, especially in relation to evolution. However, the adaptation in buildings is very different from the adaptation in biology.

    A small part of the process of building adaptation, like evolutionary adaptation in biology works by modifying the genotype (pattern). This kind of adaptation is in some ways similar to biological adaptation, but it is not coded through the genes. It is purely functional, and it is driven only by functional pressure. But it is also driven by geometrical considerations of coherence.

    It is this geometrical-adaptive process that drives much creation and the making of a living environment. This process is also called the centering process. This centering process contains about fifteen geometrical properties that are helpful in this process. The geometric properties include properties such as centers, boundaries, sub-symmetries, levels of scale, deep interlock, etc

    “Thesen: Pattern Language and Beyond” | Hajo Neis | November 2010 | MICC-Experten/innen at http://micc-project.org/wp-content/uploads/neis-architektur-patterns20101.pdf

    Beyond Patterns: From Pattern Language to the Language of Centers

    “Beyond Patterns: From Pattern Language to the Language of Centers” (presentation slides) | Hajo Neis | Nov. 2010 | “The Patterns of Patterns: Pattern Language and Beyond”, MICC Experten/innen Workshop at http://micc-project.org/wp-content/uploads/pr%C3%A4s-neis-MICC2010.pdf

    (translated) How can we organizations that constantly play like musicians dynamically forward and more and more are under pressure to change, better understand and shape? What strategies are the basis for innovation? What is constructive improvisation beyond crisis management and the role of patterns in the interdisciplinary work?

    (translated) These are the questions the research team MICC (music – innovation – corporate – culture) of the University of Duisburg-Essen, headed by Prof. Wolfgang Stark together with cooperation partners from practice organizations and the musicians Christopher Dell after.

    “Dokumentation “Pattern Language and beyond” MICC-Workshop 9.12.2010” | March 2011 | Music Innovation Corporate Culture | at http://micc-project.org/?p=928

     
  • daviding 1:18 pm on November 19, 2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: digital, markets, value, variety, viability   

    2015/11/19 09:30 Irene Ng, “Creating New Markets in the Digital Economy” 

    A seminar at Wolfson College by @ireneclng, with an abstract:

    Digitisation is radically changing the way we buy and experience products and services. As such, companies need to understand the implications of digital connectivity, from the need to design and scale future business models to better fit ‘lived lives’, to creating value as well as increasing worth so that new markets can emerge.

    Following her Wolfson@50 lecture on Nov 18, Irene Ng will hold a seminar based on her highly-acclaimed book Creating New Markets in the Digital Economy. During this half-day event, Irene will speak on the future of the Digital Economy, applying concepts from the book. Amongst the topics addressed during the event are: “Where is the Internet-of-Things (IoT)’s impact on industry”; “What are the business/financial models in data and IoT”; “Where will markets of the future be?”; “How will lives be changed in an age of ubiquitous technology and data?”. Irene will also provide her take on current issues on the state of the digital economy, the dominance of Internet businesses, the state’s role, the empowerment of individuals and the HAT (hubofallthings.com).

    Irene Ng is Senior Member of Wolfson and Professor of Marketing and Service Systems, and Director of the International Institute for Product and Service Innovation at the University of Warwick.

    This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker’s presentation(s) and comments from the audience. The content should not be viewed as an official transcript of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. The digest has been made available for purposes of scholarship,  by David Ing.


    [Irene Ng]

    Wrote and published books in 2013 with digital rights, Creating New Markets in the Digital Economy.

    Then a publisher bought the hardcopy rights, with the condition the PDF version be removed

    15 years as entrepreneur, 15 years in academia

    • Undergraduate in physics
    • Graduate work in marketing, mathematical economics
    • Published in operations and supply chain, marketing, economics, sociology
    • A mutt (multidisciplinary)
    • Need to have a discipline, a home, a mother ship where a lot of the contributions come back from in the peer community
    • An academic or entrepreneur?  An academic, as know whose opinions matter
    • A lot of work is with startups, an angel investor
    • Work meshes practice and entrepreneurial

    No sacred cows, can play with everything

    • Used to own Empress Cruise Lines, sold it, and then had to sue them
    • Had become an academic
    • An offshore casino on the high seas, Panamanian flag, Liberian
    • Hauled everything into court, could then write a case study

    When work in markets and business markets, two strong types of researchers:

    • ON-IT researchers:  describe, create insight and reflect what’s happening in the market, rear view mirror looking back
    • This is what we have, when there’s lots of data
    • IN-IT designers and engineers:  who want to shape, invent, create markets, and shape
    • Now, there’s more IN-IT than ON-IT
    • Attendees have an instinct that something is changing
    • IN-IT research uses ON-IT research, and thinking about how the future is shaped
    • But IN-IT research has no data, so how do you move forward when you don’t know
    • A lot of this research is this way

    Three most fundamental aspects of the book that may not come across that strongly

    • Interact more on Facebook than LinkedIn or Twitter

    Wolfson College

    Value, variety and viability:  The three tenets of creating markets

    • Viability is the firm perspective

    1.  Value:  a lot of papers on academia.edu

    • Integrative framework of value, summation of the works on value

    Have inherited a Smith world, 500 years of trade:  pay something, get something

    • Is that normal?  Yes, for 1000 years
    • Before that, it was barter (and there wasn’t currency)
    • Currency and money is only since the last 1000 years
    • From a historical point of view, why do we have money?
    • Today, no gold standard, and have quantitative easing, which is based on perception
    • Blockchain might change that
    • Then want to think about the most basic things
    • Adam Smith:  Produce and trade, that’s where the wealth of nations come from
    • Buying shoes, happier when buying them when using them (which is unusual)
    • Normally, car, music, massauge, it’s the use — a value-induced approach

    Book talk about goodness

    • Plato’s cave
    • If you think about value just in terms of “good”, then there’s no transcending thought
    • Have to say what is good, to whom
    • Can’t create value for everyone:  it’s to who, of something
    • It’s not a scalar, it’s vector
    • What is good for the firm isn’t good for the customer:  Not just the value of coffee, but where it was created
    • To whom, about what … and where was it created
    • Processually:  where was this created? how was it created?

    Book talks about the way value is created, from the user creating it, with agency

    • Coffee has agency with the person drinking it
    • If no one wants to drink the coffee, no agency
    • If the cup doesn’t lend itself to drinking, have to pair with some affordance:  affording drinking
    • What companies do:  they don’t create value, they enable it with some attribute
    • Also value when it’s created and where it’s created

    To create the value, need an outcome

    • Outcome is different from value
    • Not thirsty is an outcome
    • The way to create that outcome can be different

    If value isn’t the same as the outcome, then the goodness to achieve the outcome isn’t value

    • Use phone, book, pen:  how many times do we think that this is good?  We don’t
    • Value isn’t something that you’re going to evaluate all of the time
    • This is why a lot of value is described in a phenomenological sense … which makes sense in an ontological perspective
    • Firms would like to ask you:  do you value this?
    • e.g. satisfaction measures, pressing button from good to bad
    • Level of cognition comes in the way we evaluate things
    • P-value:  can’t be measured (phenomenological)
    • Access value:  when you are asked
    • Link between satisfaction and value?

    So, value is co-created

    • Customer resources to cocreate

    Buy products to get benefits

    • Steve Vargo and Bob Lusch:  Service-dominant logic
    • Cited 6000 times since publication in 2004, not just in business school, but by engineering, operations and innovations researchers
    • Goods-dominant logic:  e.g. producing a mobile phone as an end it itself
    • However, many old phones sitting in draw without a function
    • Only a person can realize and enhance it:  if phone the stockbroker, don’t thank Apple or Vodaphone
    • However, when get lost, may thank Google Maps for showing the way
    • Attribution theory
    • The value is created by me, but the firm has no control, yet the firm can advertise the value
    • Premier Inn:  You can get a good night’s sleep or your money back — how does that happen, who is coming into my room to ensure I’m getting a good night’s sleep?
    • There’s a blank between the attribute of outcome and value
    • We have subjugated ourselves away from the economy.  Why?
    • Mind has closed in:  process of checking in, sleeping — you think Premier Inn is true, they can promise outcome
    • This is because all activities and practices are opaque, part of the phenomena, not in the GDP
    • Subjugated human activities
    • Don’t think about drinking coffee, because think it’s free … to you
    • You bought half of the product (the bed), and you contribute the other half (in your mind) — which is cocreation
    • You allow hotels to advertise this

    More and more of our practices are become less opaque, in a digital world

    • While you can’t tell what I’m doing with this coffee, moving to a world where you can
    • Digitization:  could be a half a million people know that the coffee is brown, and it’s hot
    • When the cup is digitalized, would know
    • It’s all connected on the Internet
    • Everyone could be known, e.g. with posting on Facebook or Google
    • An innovation that drops in this space can change things

    Resources are used in the co-creation, could be mine

    • Symmetry is important
    • It’s in the world, but not in the GDP

    Broadband:  when we go on the Internet, do search

    • Dictionary, thesaurus, calculator are all in the GDP:  15GBP
    • Not completely reflected in GDP
    • So many things rapidly bundled, have to think about translation of value in the GDP

    Cocreation:  what is the resource?

    • Driving a car
    • Car has a lot of attributes, many driven by the resources of the firm
    • But then driving, the consequences and desired end state is a lot of resources of the driver
    • If think about getting from getting value, what about autonomous cars?
    • Autonomous cars are think in value from the firm’s side
    • However, there is the experience of driving the car, the status symbol of owning a car
    • In every dimension of goodness, some of it comes the firm, but a lot of it is how I feel
    • So, value creation is multidimensional

    Innovation, in all products, has some things that can be taken over by the firm

    • To get from A to B, could take the bicycle
    • The role of the firm is seen in the light of human beings, and practices we have towards outcomes
    • Practices are opaque
    • However, as soon as outsource to a driver, it enters the GDP:  you stop driving, someone else drives you

    Where is value created?  What is opaque?

    • In the 1970s, 1980s, became a service economy
    • It’s not because we went into services, it’s because companies outsourced their internal functions
    • e.g. BMW outsourced cafeteria, manufacturing
    • Thus, became the biggest driver of the economy
    • In the future, as more digital comes in, it will become less opaque, and GDP will increase

    In the old days on the phone, no one cared what you were browsing

    • Now, information from Safari goes to Apple
    • They can monetize your data
    • It appears in the GDP
    • Does this help?

    Farmer example:

    • Farmer, harvest and packages
    • If eats apples, uses resources
    • If she has a toothache, no outcome

    [break, need to speed up]

    Context important

    • How does a firm create form and content, if it doesn’t know what the context will be to the customer

    Value is contextual. Resources are also contextual.

    • Babies smile
    • Do you take a picture with a phone or a camera?
    • The phone is an available resource, the camera is in the drawn
    • Things become value in context, because they enable resources for cocreation in context for outcomes
    • SD Logic:  value becomes
    • Resource-Based View of the firm, doesn’t mean that all resources are the same
    • The resource is a resource if it helps us:  it’s not the camera’s fault or the company’s fault that they don’t use it
    • Proliferation of cameras and phones, are in context
    • The camera and phone could be functionally the same, but not provide the same value in context

    People forget that when you create value in context, that means that it’s not created when you buy it (or put it in a drawer)

    • Beer in the larder, not yet created value
    • Sunday with the sports, drink it — there’s the value
    • But if you didn’t buy it and chill it, could have someone come to the door with chilled beer, and would pay double
    • Willingness to pay creates where market is
    • Difference in competence (differently from the way companies it the word):  What are our resources?
    • If we think about the stuff around it, we create value with a small subset of ourselves
    • That’s small potential, but it’s not being used

    2. Variety:  The most importance concept to be tagged with value, especially in an age where digitilization is coming through

    • Human life is lived in variety
    • (Heideggerian in philosophy)
    • Our lives are so clockwork:  get the train to go to work
    • Most designed things are designed around routine
    • Variety isn’t usually good in routine … but that’s what living is
    • Thinking about the use of things leads everyone to think about routine
    • Able to lift the coffee cup, able to use the pen
    • Anyone outside of the norm is marginalized, not by society, but sometimes by the products we use:  routinized products
    • We then marginalize individuals who can’t exercise the routines
    • Can you have a product that understands variety?
    • Engineer would say:  no, you need to make a different product
    • But not making a variety in products — it’s variety in use
    • Every day, I use my mug in a different way … or my shoe in a different way
    • Variety in use — something that product designers don’t like, as can’t specify requirements
    • But we make tradeoffs
    • If want to make you a cup of coffee, you can specify any way you would drink it:  today with milk and sugar
    • But then replace with a vending machine, have to think about about the variety it provides
    • Products create rigidity
    • The world started with services, and then became rigid
    • Now wake up, first reach for the phone, which was different from 10 years ago when there was more variety

    What is a product?  Jaeyoon Yu says it’s a template for behaviour

    • We, as human beings, are templates
    • Our templates don’t have enough variety
    • The more variety the template gives you, the more the market rewards you
    • Phone used to be a simple template, now it’s so much more
    • It’s fragmenting
    • On a smartphone, there’s lots of ways to communicate, now
    • Our ability to connect, not just between selves but between things, has gone hyper
    • It works for some people, and others become overwhelmed
    • Used to be happy with iPod for music, but when then connected, it’s not enough
    • Generativity theory:  human beings request the next step, when they experience things

    This is caused by contextual variety:  the context of using it

    • Variety is the latent need, the manifestation of latent demand for future products
    • Resonance chamber:  a music hall, where the ceiling has movable plates, where depending on the music, it changes its acoustics
    • That’s a product that can change its capability in context of use
    • Do we have a mug that can change itself into a wineglass when you pour wine into it?  Not yet
    • However, there are new materials coming, could change in context
    • A human being can serve you with coffee, but can’t scale
    • A product can scale, but is rigid
    • It’s not a surprise with that McDonalds serves you with people … but now they’re coming up with a vending machine (which is complex, as it tries to understand your variety).
    • A vending machine makes a person modularize behaviour
    • e.g. if want bun toasted, could ask for it; now have to push button by button
    • A lot of firms don’t understand need firms to change, but don’t know about context

    3:  Viability – the value for the firm

    • Have to think about revenues and costs
    • Only one product that has a single cost — space travel
    • Other markets are based in variety
    • Transfer pricing is an interesting problem:  who subsidizes whom, on a plane?  Economy subsidize business class, or reverse? Both
    • If had all business class, prices would drop
    • If had all economy class, no subsidy
    • Have to think about both scale and revenue
    • Candy Crush:  Transactions are, at most, a dollar … but there’s a billion of them
    • Insulin patch:  thinking the customer should pay more?  Maybe should pay less.  Now 100,000 customers, but if had a target to pay less if customers scale up to 500,000
    • The power of scale:  possible by material products, e.g. 3-D printers
    • Why not have USB all around the house?  Would bring the price down
    • If there’s a digital infrastructure around it, would get even more scale

    In 1996, when iPhone came out, how many segments of phones did Nokia have? 10 or 20?

    • iPhone initially created one phone, collapsing 10 segments into one
    • In business school, thought customization cost more
    • iPhone shatters assumption, as the individual customizes the phone
    • Apple is the large phone company, they were lucky that they created the platform, with the Apple brand in the premium game
    • Apple didn’t plan on this:  Steve Jobs doesn’t like software, he wasn’t building a phone, he was building a computer, Apple doesn’t do software
    • Steve Jobs says he doesn’t build software, Bill Gates does
    • Created a platform that can be totally personalized … although they haven’t decided on size
    • Apple is trying to learn how a mother would use a big phone differently from a daughter who uses a small phone
    • Only we know our variety, our use context, how we’re going to use it, when we’re going to use it
    • Just give us the platform
    • Almost everything is going that way
    • Don’t want to do standardization

    Could we do this with a car, e.g. a dashboard that is fully customizable?

    • Every industry locks in path dependency, will be hard to change

    Now we have the three core concepts of Value, Variety and Viability, in the book

    • We’ll talk around that now

    [This is from yesterday’s lecture, “Payment is applause: markets and business models past, present and future“]

    Irene in 1965, 2 years old, black and white photo

    1965 in UK

    • M4 opens
    • Permissive society begins, divorce rates goup
    • Sound of Music released
    • Beatles, Help
    • First Grateful Dead concert
    • Quantities of scale in industrialization
    • U.S. recovering from 1950s standardization

    What is the economic model:  how does what, we gets what?

    • Business model is about the way the company does business:  value proposition, experience of product, the way we buy products

    Individual-centered view of the world (more right that wrong)

    • It’s users that drive markets
    • Technology doesn’t disrupt markets, it’s the users
    • There are lots of technologies that never reach you, when it’s created in a garage
    • Markets begin when you take out your wallet
    • In a computer lab, Apple is always old technology, but they create new markets

    Humans buy capabilities:

    • Hammer:  Need, tool, capability
    • Firms supply the tools
    • Human applaud, by paying
    • Firms seem to hate companies that make profits, but yet we pay them
    • Margins are different issue from paying:  we applause
    • We have the agency to pay, sometimes without question

    Are we buying tools or capabilities?

    • Need, hungry; tool, food; capability is caveman hunting
    • Today, still hungry; more tools as choices of food; capabilities through work
    • Need to look good; tools makeup; capability is looking good
    • Tools are bought in markets

    Where are markets?

    • Trading ducks for vegetables, at the river delta
    • But then someone wants half a duck
    • Original markets were utilitarian
    • Markets began on water transportation at river mouths, becoming cities

    Markets today:

    • Amazon
    • Shopping malls
    • Street markets
    • Two reasons we buy:  hedonistic, or utilitarian
    • Markets are powerful, if you know how to shape them

    Starting to see markets evolving into multi-sided markets

    • How did the shopping mall come about?  Why not a big department store?
    • Variety
    • After a while, one company can’t do it
    • They open up a platform and let others create more variety
    • Have gone through phases where one company could not provide it all
    • eBay, Amazon, are all evolving into multi-sided markets

    What is the role of markets?

    • (1) Market has a huge role in coordination
    • How would you know where to get a tool, if you didn’t go to a market
    • Need to go to a place, e.g. Amazon
    • When there are so many tools and capabilities, it’s a huge role to find who has what, who wants what, and who will pay
    • (2) Must have a mechanism to fulfill needs
    • The exchange has to consummate through the price
    • Apple Pay is now coming in
    • (3) Allocation and reallocation of resources
    • When the demand for tea goes up, the production goes up
    • When Christmas comes, products come in
    • This is why Apple wants to know what you want to use the product for
    • Have you ever tried to establish a price to sell to a friend?
    • The market helps to lubricate the price setting, sometimes through auctions (eBay), sometimes through proposals
    • (4) Provides choice and freedoms to absorb variety and individual heterogeneity
    • (5) However, markets will create externalities (pollution)
    • In the digital world, markets bring up issues of privacy
    • (6) Markets may fail, or might not exist, e.g. public goods
    • e.g. U.S. doesn’t have a coast-to-coast railroad, but who would pay for that?
    • Often, the state will say they’ll pay for it, as a public good
    • Who will pay for roads
    • (7) Markets may need to be regulated
    • Typical theory of the firm says that shareholder equity matters, or labour — opportunism to cheat, lie

    Who else does this?

    • Would the state do this better?
    • Centralized planning:  communism, where the state does all of these functions
    • Then people say, don’t want the state to do this
    • But then:  when would the state do it better?
    • Some would say that the state does better in health
    • Have NHS, universal healthcare
    • Obamacare is a strange mix of healthcare and payers
    • The market does this, but the state gives it a hand
    • HAT?  Market socialism?

    Advances

    • 1975, personal computer
    • Who owns and accesses that information?
    • We started with a dumb terminal with a big head (mainframe)
    • We then went to smart terminal with no head (personal computing)
    • Now, back to smart with big head?
    • 1979, digital music:  we can digitize the analog
    • The first possibilities of digitalization, can send it everywhere
    • Today, can digitalize the colour of a book cover
    • Will move into practices
    • 1989:  The worldwide web
    • We can move information
    • 1974:  Universal Product Code, revolutionalized supply chains, gave clue that we could track everything
    • 1973:  Mobile phone:  we can do (whatever) on the move and on demand
    • Universal utility belt, a superpower
    • But who knows what we’re doing?  Apple does
    • 1995: GPS, we know where we are

    Four major influences:

    1. Globalization, role of markets have changed

    • Manufacturing to China
    • Prices are political, protectionism
    • Entrenchment?

    Digitalization

    • International Journal of Research in Marketing:  “Internet of Things: Review and Research Agenda”, can e-mail Irene to ask for PDF
    • Richard Normann called this liquidification
    • Irene calls it leaking
    • Information will leak out everywhere
    • Details on train, where it will arrive, space in one car for seating, another car for bicycles
    • They physical thing is leaking, new transactions
    • You don’t pay for search, would you pay for the train?
    • The data is liquidified, it’s moving everywhere
    • How do you price information of the train?
    • We used to buy CDs, now pay $9.95 a month, have a bath and soak playlist, have a barbeque playlist, each created for contexts
    • Should this reward, or punish entrenched places

    Connectivity:

    • From computers, to people, to everything
    • What happens to exchange?
    • You don’t know who wants half a duck for a little bit of vegetables
    • What’s the role of money?
    • What’s the role of the social economy, where can pay someone for cooking by walking their dog
    • These all disappear from the GDP, but our lives may not be that bad
    • AirBnB and Uber have taken advantage of connectivity for exchanges

    Computers, Computable and Connected Smart Things

    • Have something that would catch all of the information like a PC would break up into parts of the body
    • Service provision may not be from the firm
    • Ph.D. studying the role of the firm?  Coase says it’s efficiency.  What if everything was known in parts?

    Markets change

    • Locations/places, physically and spatially
    • In time, both absolute and relative time between buying and using
    • Friction is the separation between the purchase and the using it
    • Don’t have variety of tea in the morning, it can’t be digitalized
    • The last yard:  the market of the future
    • Who will buy?

    Look at markets from value, variety and viability, maybe the markets haven’t changed so much

    • Market inefficiencies
    • Path of least resistance
    • On RyanAir flight, can’t get a Cafe Nero coffee; but on a hot day in front of Empire State Building a water vendor will come
    • Vendors will come because they will pay, in context, and in demand
    • This is where wealth is

    More than 50 years of an exchange economy, looking for a business model

    • Three parts:  (i) the market, (ii) the experience, and (iii) the offering
    • In the digital economy, how you design the offering will be more entangled with the experience, and how you pay for it
    • When you have the firm paying for music, it changes the experience, the way you use it
    • Connecting products to it, then different industries can creep in
    • Amazon, moving into video
    • Google, moving into physical space, Nest
    • Moving to the domain of connected stuff, serving you to give different capabilities

    The future?  Beyond the research, crystal wall gazing

    • The future is beyond capability (way beyond markets)
    • Belief the future is through amplification and augmentation
    • The ability to be in multiple places in multiple times — have cameras in the house, can view from anywhere
    • Choices and freedoms, want to work from a beach, that requires a lot of augmentation
    • Augmentation in demand, when I want it
    • To shape society, we need to shape markets, not merely reflect it
    • Bots:  Strive for individualization as much as we strive for automation
    • Human beings will always fight back
    • Market cap of Facebook, Amazon, Google, Twitter is USD$988 billion
    • Market cap of P&G, Nestle, Coca Cola and Samsung is USD$815 billion
    • Epic collision between companies on data, and companies that sell things

    As an IN-IT thinker, could shape this

    The new battlefront is the control, access and combinations of personal data for the augmentation and amplification of human capabilities

    • This means the control of personal data

    Need to intervene:  http://hubofallthings.com

    • Layer missing, want some personal data back
    • I could have a HAT, could use it to analyze my data
    • If me make the HAT fee, and standardize, yet personal for own data, then it will be viable for the firms to create apps on top of that
    • Have spent GBP1.2M across 6 universities
    • How do we internalize externalities
    • Have to create a market for personal data
    • If go to a restaurant, and have a hat, they could give you your data back
    • Today, we have terrible knowledge ability, recall ability
    • Companies have it, why don’t we have them as individuals?
    • It’s an irony
    • When you sign up with Google and Facebook, your protection of personal data is pathetic.
    • But if you host with AWS and sign up with Tesco, going near that data would become industrial espionage
    • Instead of waiting for governments to come to this, could do this
    • Rolling out HATs in UK and Singapore in 1H2016

    [Questions]

    Digital innovation relevant for physical products?

    • Path dependency is important
    • If used to a certain world, hard to change
    • Toilet manufacturer can put in sensors to measure urine, but he thinks he’s a toilet manufacturer
    • As an SME, it’s hard to get funding together
    • His market is builders, not consumers, where he doesn’t have competence, doesn’t know which channel to use
    • No one has a toilet app
    • The whole process of getting into a new value system requires a transversal of innovations
    • Digitalization liquidifies information where it’s important
    • Instead of having a sensor in a beer glass, can sell more by having a bartender coming up to ask you
    • For consumer packaged manufacturers, their data stops at the grocery store
    • Meta information is important, e.g. close to empty, when and how you consume them
    • A lot of money in CRM, when and where you buy it
    • Reverse supply chain:  waste and recyclables, have a huge impact on packaging
    • Saying it’s all digital, which one goes in first?
    • Glass is becoming more digital, it can become dark to become a screen to project
    • Materials, and the ability to absorb digital become important

    Big data

    • An externality, don’t know where the data could be used
    • Could be used to figure out who you are, where you are
    • See HAT video
    • Firms have no choice but to anonymize the data
    • The HAT has more power than the firm, because can share my data
    • Big data solidified the need for understanding data science, but more through algorithms than insights

    Control of personal data, trust.  Can be handled through blockchain

    • HAT is all of the metadata, could be disruptive more in the digital world than the physical world
    • Supposed can establish things as fact, rather than speculation
    • Blockchain gives a mechanism where you can trust the fact; trusting the vendor is another story
    • Imagine all of your life, if everything is a fact
    • Think of a plumber with all of his work is fact, and there’s defects years later
    • Immutability is a factor:  when I jump, how do you know it’s me, and not my dog on the activity monitor

    When value is created?  e.g. fire extinguisher, insurance, may never get benefit, although do have peace of mind

    • Many people look at function, in terms of value
    • Peace of mind is enduring when you have it, it’s a value in use (as opposed to value in experience)
    • Have a Ferrari in the driveway, but never drive it, get the value of status
    • “Value in use” isn’t a good term, “value in experience” is better in multiple dimensions

    Variety, behavioural economics says beyond a certain level, the choices get harder, not easier

    • Variety more in experience, different from variety in buying it
    • If too much variety at the point of exchange, it adds costs to the person
    • A lot of variety in experience is taken care of in experience
    • At point of buying, want wide variety, but less complexity

    Commercial plan on rumple

    HAT data exchange, charge for privacy, etc.

    • An Apple model, providing a device, but money is made separately in the apps

    Toktok:  government mandating security

    [Slides available on request by contacting Irene Ng]

     
  • daviding 4:15 pm on September 29, 2015 Permalink | Reply  

    Impressed that #GoogleNow alerted of cancelled flight tomorrow OSL-HEL on SAS. Phoned FlightCentre back home, who said automatic rebooking BRU-OSL / OSL-ARN / ARN-HEL. My agent said SAS first said couldn’t rebook, as originally issued as Air Canada flight, then eventually got override code. Now scheduled to fly BRU-ARN / ARN-HEL on a loose connection, arriving a few minutes earlier than originally planned. GoogleNow intelligently picked up flight cancellation from the booking on my Google Calendar.

     
  • daviding 4:29 pm on September 12, 2015 Permalink | Reply  

    Updated old eeePC 1025C with Xubuntu 12.04 with system updates and Asus BIOS 1301 updates from 2013, in preparation for spouse coming on trip through Europe. Linux kernel 3.40 with Xorg 1.11.3 seem to be running fine. In Chrome, “Ok Google” and even dictation.io work fine. Not risking the free offer to upgrade to Xubuntu 14.04 LTS for free.

     
  • daviding 9:56 pm on August 14, 2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    2015/07/11 10:35 Panel, ISIE SIEYP, U. Surrey 

    Panel of @MingXuUMich, @cbdvs, Noa Meron, @weslynneashton, Megha Shenoy at the “ISIE Symposium on Industrial Ecology for Young Professionals“, 8th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Industrial Ecology, University of Surrey, Guildford, July 11, 2015

    This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker’s presentation(s) and comments from the audience. The content should not be viewed as an official transcript of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. The digest has been made available for purposes of scholarship by David Ing.

    [Moderated by Jonathan Krones, from MIT Engineering Systems Division]

    Where is Industrial Ecology going next?


    DI_20150711 043642 SIEYP panel

    Ming Xu, U. Michigan, student chapter since 2006

    • A few months ago, co-edited special issue on Complex Adaptive Systems
    • Article on big data, don’t like the title big data, but catchy title
    • Computational and data-driven approach
    • IE has seen more and more interest and potential from computational and data-driven approaches
    • New sources of data are becoming available due to ICT devices, social media data
    • Most important is the method that big data guys use

    Chris Davis, U. Groningen

    • Work in data, data for sustainability
    • The future is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed
    • Look at papers
    • Work on open data, machine learning
    • Working with industrial symbiosis data, so less frustrating
    • Have alpha geeks who play with this, then people who are scared
    • Did a bachelor degree in computer science, but now things have become more mature
    • We have to get better at using the tools
    • Tools help think more about automation
    • Chris was talking about plumbing, we’re data plumbers
    • Supply and demand of data sets
    • Big data is people don’t know what it is, talking to people who don’t know what it is
    • Open data, Open Street Map is 50GB downloadable
    • Power grids, government won’t release as scared
    • Should also talk about small data: machine learning, teach computers
    • LCA and IO analysis, maybe should think outside the matrix, matrix isn’t the best data
    • Crowdsource data on power plants, thought people would rush in, mostly me
    • Sculptor:  can see Russian power plants at night

    Noa Meron, Tel Aviv U.

    • IE background, good at looking a production types, know much less about consumer side, in use phase, consumer choices, demand
    • Must invest more in understanding consumers
    • Then go back and convert for use in IE
    • Where should we expand
    • Should encourage other fields to IE tools, we have great studies, but what about policies
    • Now in business school, trying to encourage decision-making

    Weslynne Ashton, Illinois Institute of Technology

    • Originally from Trinidad-Tobago, now in the U.S.
    • Ph.D. at Yale
    • Now at IIT, host of next conference
    • One of few IE Ph.D.s ending up in business schools
    • How can business use industrial ecology?
    • 1. IE started as an applied discipline, understanding environment impact, transforming an industrial system
    • Using data, trying to get data from the production side
    • Need to be in closer dialogue with industry
    • A piece missing:  communicate more effectively with decision-makers into something usable
    • Not all IE students will end up in universities
    • Have met 2 former Ph.Ds. in industry at this conference:  they found gems that are useful, that they would have to spend thousand of dollars in a research group, and industry is five years behind; but they have industrial ecology training, the average business person won’t look for gems
    • 2. Most of work is in industrial symbiosis
    • Kalundborg is seen as cute; is it serious?
    • Most research into industrial symbiosis has been case studies, can we compare?
    • Industrial symbiosis as a subfield of IE is maturing.
    • Can apply LCA, agent-based modeling
    • Many are now taking a social science perspective
    • As a study, heard materials don’t flow, people move them:  so why is a business interested in moving a material from place A to place B?
    • Industrial symbosis is growing up
    • 3. In developing countries, there’s a lots of things similar to IE
    • Reach out to developing countries, address problems with research

    Megha Shenoy, independent sustainability researcher, India

    • Started in industrial psychology
    • Focused on industrial ecology
    • Did a postdoc at Yale
    • Went back to India in 2009 to work on IE in India, great that was already an organization there
    • Lot of resistance from industry and policy makers to not taking path that developed countries have, that create waste and then have to clean up
    • Most immediate problems of policy makers can’t be addressed by IE specialties
    • Go first to find problems they’re interested in
    • Data, how to recognize problems, and try to solve them
    • Data in developing countries is limited, a gap
    • Consider data downsizing, picking out the most important things, so developing countries can select a few things
    • Economic instruments and structures:  there’s a lot of international debt, then getting locked in with energy-intensive resources
    • Lifting people from poverty

    [Questions]

    Engage scholars?

    • Do some research, engage people
    • Interest in workshops, seminars
    • Need to be out there

    Business engagement?

    • Society has wanted more business engagement for some time
    • Meat of research has shifted to be more academic
    • Yet people do have connections to business, sometimes to get student projects, sometimes told to, sometimes for funding
    • Engagement as society is tougher, because what we’re doing
    • 8 tracks, 15 minutes, isn’t great to bring business people in
    • Need to figure this out, how to mesh
    • Two-year conference is designed for science side
    • People tend to ask why work isn’t impacting policy, without understanding the logic of policy, engagement of stakeholders
    • It’s better to be an expert of something useful to policy world, then will be invited in
    • Other view:  can we do this type of work, and will it fit with professional development:  can we get promoted for this work?  What is recognized by university?
    • Journal welcomes application implementation, would like to know that tools helped, or IE tries to do something engaged
    • Can’t be a simple narrative, it has to be conceptually well-grounded
    • Work to be done talking about IE to non-science, policy world, don’t get enough on that

    In future conferences, have more interactive or educational sessions?  Why not go to other conferences, too?

    • Difficult starting from where we are now, moving towards policy
    • Multiple layers
    • Learned at environment engineering conference, there’s a lot of channels from social engineering
    • More people read tweets than journal articles
    • A lot of journalists are also scientists

    Big data yes, but make something big out of small data:

     

     
  • daviding 9:53 pm on August 14, 2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    2015/07/11 10:00 Reid Lifset, “From Oxymoron to Interdisciplinary Field: The Origins and Prospects for Industrial Ecology”, ISIE SIEYP, U. Surrey 

    Talk by Reid Lifset, Yale U. at the “ISIE Symposium on Industrial Ecology for Young Professionals“, 8th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Industrial Ecology, University of Surrey, Guildford, July 11, 2015

    This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker’s presentation(s) and comments from the audience. The content should not be viewed as an official transcript of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. The digest has been made available for purposes of scholarship by David Ing.

    [Moderated by Jonathan Krones, from MIT Engineering Systems Division]


    Reid Lifset is Research Scholar and Resident Fellow, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, and Editor in Chief of the Journal of Industrial Ecology

    [Reid Lifset]

    Backstory and context

    Frosch and Gallopolous, “Strategies for Manufacturing” Scientific American 1989 had a different name

    • Also Bob Ayres work in American Economic Review in 1989
    • Frosch was head of R&D at GM; also NASA; U.N. Economic Development Program
    • Interest in 1960s U.S.
    • Pioneering investment in the 1970s:  not just in energy, but also in material resources, with ambitious reports to congress

    Then when Ronald Reagan was elected, everything stopped

    • Energy markets plummetted in the 1980s
    • 1980s concern on soil contamination, remediation, assigning responsiblity for cleaning contanimnated sites
    • Late 1980s, resource availability, recycling — quiet
    • Concerns about environmental quaility, air pollution, water pollution
    • Discourse about expense of environment remediation cost
    • U.S. Academy of Engineering coming out of that environment
    • Desire to do it right in the first place, so society doesn’t have massive costs
    • Little discourse about climate
    • Brundtland Report was 1987, discussion sustainability hasn’t started

    In Europe and Nordics, interest in industrial/societal metabolism

    • U.S. NAE colloquium
    • AT&T with Tom Graedel and others, twisted arm of philanthropy to respond to U.S. NAE
    • Life cycle assessment started in the late 1960s, concerns on packaging, so Coke went to predecessor of Franklin Associates, Midwest Research Institute out of Kansas City, to counter NGOs concerned about one-way packaging
    • Locus on LCA shifted from U.S. to Europe, UK and elsewhere
    • Cleaner production people from Northern Europe:  solid waste, shifted upstream to generation and entire product life cycle; with another thread coming out from toxics, focused on substances, mostly at the facilities level
    • Marina Fischer-Kowalski talks of intellectual history on industry-social metabolism:  Paul Brunner, TU Vienna wrote “Metabolism of the Anthroposphere”; Bob Ayres through U.N. Press wrote “Industrial Metabolism”.
    • Then Kalundborg was discovered, had been operating for some time, picked up by Newsweek, then one of John Ehrenfeld’s master’s student wrote an article in the first JIE

    Another piece coming out of biofuel energy:  sulfur cycles

    • How things cycle at a global level, playing into substance flow analysis

    Institutionalization

    • Tom Graedel had came from 1997 in AT&T, first professor of IE
    • First textbook
    • Journal started in 1997 before society; industrial ecology was hot, everyone said they were doing it (relabelling what they were doing); feared that consultants would fill out the society, and IE would become a mushy area
    • Society started in 2001

    Used to introduce field as Industrial Ecology is industrial

    • At that time, focus was on industry
    • Can industry be an actor that plays, rather than being villain
    • Future-oriented, design-oriented, was in industrial sector where decisions were made

    Industrial ecology is ecology

    • Carrying capacity
    • Anthroposphere and the larger system in which it’s enclosed
    • Were we exceed the carrying capacity of the earth?
    • Before ecological footprint

    Moving from linear to circular flows (Graedel)

    • a Type II Industrial Ecosystem

    These were central to the field in the first decade

    • Do the analogies in natural systems line up with the way the economy work
    • Ecosystem ecology, systems ecology — flows through the system
    • Lots of debates
    • John Ehrenfeld, a key leader, leader in Environmental Business and Society program at MIT, said had to develop this, as it’s really central
    • Ehrenfeld didn’t have his way
    • But it’s now coming back in Circular Economy

    Is Circular Economy just a metaphor?

    • Reviving this idea
    • 1976 Loop Economy, Walter Sockel
    • 1993 Swedes were using closed loops in policy
    • 1991 Cradle to Cradle earliest version
    • 2000 Japan’s Basic Acdt for Establishing a Sound Matierail-Cycle Society
    • 2009 China’s Circulat Economony Promotion Law (learning from Sweden)
    • 2009 Kore’s National Strategy for Green Growth  and Five year Plan
    • 2010 Ellen MacArthur Foundation
    • 2011 Morioka, Hanaki & Moriguchi, Establishing a Resource-Circulating Socity in Asia
    • Also had Benyus, Biomimicry, but analogy

    Industrial Ecology emphasizes:

    • Systems approach, sometimes plays out in life cycle approach, and sometimes in mass balance in materials accounting
    • Impact of technology
    • Preventitive strategies

    Elements of Industrial Ecology

    • In the first 5 to 10 years, it was advocated as the “next best thing to sliced bread”
    • A lot of ideas now compeeting with IE hadn’t yet emerged
    • World was worried about water and air pollution, and IE says you don’t want to look at one toxic substance or one life cycle stage
    • Greg Allenby:  made really ambitious claims for IE, as the central framework for everything in the environment
    • So, saw scaling back of ambition

    Industrial Ecology at various scales

    • Emergence of looking at materials and energy at different scale

    Now in the world, where everyone offers their own label

    • Some have stayed, some are new
    • The Natural Step:  former student had been a CEO of national section, still active in Sweden and Canada

    The field has become more modelled

    • Less attached to industry
    • Pieces most accessible to industry, e.g. life cycle assessment, is central to the field
    • Doing more input-output analysis
    • Have to do more translation for business

    [Questions]

    Progress in IE journal?

    • Started by an ambitious guy in Finland
    • Published a lot of interesting work, impatient
    • Editorial strategy or it’s what he got?

    How to bring a social science perspective, questioning the purpose of IE, how to be more diverse

    • Exhortations to bring social science to IE
    • Have pieces of that
    • Challenge:  how to expand the scope of IE, and still keep its divinity
    • Need a central thread to stay together as a field
    • A lot of work in social science is bringing social impact; others are bringing social theory

     
  • daviding 9:46 pm on August 14, 2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    2015/07/11 09:30 Chris Kennedy, “The Plumbing for a New Industrial Ecology”, ISIE SIEYP, U. Surrey 

    Talk by Chris Kennedy, U. of Toronto, at the “ISIE Symposium on Industrial Ecology for Young Professionals“, 8th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Industrial Ecology, University of Surrey, Guildford, July 11, 2015

    This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker’s presentation(s) and comments from the audience. The content should not be viewed as an official transcript of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. The digest has been made available for purposes of scholarship by David Ing.

    [Moderated by Jonathan Krones, from MIT Engineering Systems Division]

    Welcome

    • ISIE meeting was taking stock
    • SIEYP is looking forward, where IE is going next

    Chris Kennedy is Professor, Civil Engineering at the U. of Toronto, and President of the International Society for Industrial Ecology

    DI_20150711 035447 SIEYP ChrisKennedy

    [Chris Kennedy]

    Some work that is incomplete

    • Focused in infrastructure
    • Overlaps other parts of IE

    Title part of idea from OECD

    • A new industrial field
    • Ecosystem that goes around industry

    Start with Kalundborg, Denmark

    • Previous conference talks focused on oil refinery and electric power stations
    • But don’t want to focus there, because the future may not be around oil and electric

    DI_20150711 034646 SIEYP ChrisKennedy GlobalEnergyUse

    Work at different scales

    • Map of global energy system by Cullen and Allwood
    • Want final servies (e.g. transport), but we don’t like the old energy sources
    • Conversion devices will have to change
    • Leaders setting up from there

    Stefan Pauliuk presentation:

    • Link infrastructure systems to their material use
    • Others working on global input-output models
    • Ming working on Infrastructure Ecology, could fit in here, too

    DI_20150711 034727 SIEYP ChrisKennedy CarbonEmissionsOfInfrastructureDev

    Kennedy and Corfee-Morlot 2012 OECD work done as an economist, learning from industrial ecology over the year

    • From an economic perspective, how could we achieve a low carbon economy?
    • If we had the policies to promote energy efficiencies, then we no longer need to invest in the infrastructure that carries oil and natural gas
    • If decrease investment in oil and natural gas, the capital we free up needs to go into low carbon electricity generation, which makes vehicles low carbon as well
    • Result:  decrease demand for coal and oil, then don’t need to move coal and oil
    • Then can have some big infrastructure savings, particularly in countries that don’t already have them
    • Rail and ports are big infrastructure
    • Costing, enough to get working paper with OECD

    DI_20150711 035227 SIEYP ChrisKennedy ChinasGreenInvestmentNeeds

    Now working with OECD and government of China, about financing green investment in China

    • Working on Chapter 2, with colleague in Chinese university
    • (Numbers wrong, keep changing)
    • Chinese government really understands changing to an ecological civilization
    • Factor of 10 beyond U.S. superfund to clean up
    • Chart only shows to 2020, report will go beyond that
    • What’s missing is a trillion dollars for an industry treatment of waste coming out of solid, gaseous, liquid waste
    • This is just the investment in green stuff
    • Haven’t yet got data on savings in investment they won’t do

    DI_20150711 035429 SIEYP ChrisKennedy ChinasWindPower MatthewsTan

    Matthew and Tan 2014:  China’s Wind Power

    • Getting steeper and steeper

    DI_20150711 035517 SIEYP ChrisKennedy ERI IRENA High Renewables

    ERI & IRENA High Renewals Scenarios

    • Wind and solar means by 2050, oil and coal is reduced by 75%
    • Plan to do high renewalbles in China

    DI_20150711 035612 SIEYP ChrisKennedy China2050HighRenewable

    China’s primary energy consumption, ERI 2015

    • Coal peaks in 2020, if it already hasn’t
    • Is this possible thermodynamically, economically, socially?

    DI_20150711 035636 SIEYP ChrisKennedy ChinasPrimaryEnergyConsumption

    Typical day in China:  power from solar goes up during the day

    Costs:  Wind power is now competitive with coal power in China

    • Coal costs would go up with infrastructure and environmental costs

    Readapted Kennedy and Corfee-Morlot 2012, 2013 for China

    • Could poke holes in this
    • Link between coal and railway, in the context of a country that is still growing
    • China is impressive
    • UK to U.S. to China from industrial revolution scale goes up
    • China already has more high-speed rail than others

    China has a Medium to Long-term Railway Network Plan, in the context  of China 2050 High Renewal Energy Penetration Scneario and Roadmap Study (2015)

    • 112,000 to 250,000km in 2050
    • But 50% of rail traffic is coal
    • What if coal demand goes down 75%

    DI_20150711 035741 SIEYP ChrisKennedy HourlyDispatchOfNationalwidePowerGeneration

    The amount of iron ore required to build 200km of dedicated freight ral lines is equivalent to 2000GW of onshore wind turbines

    • That’s close to the envisaged wind power for 2050
    • Want someone to redo the China railway plan, taking account of industrial ecology
    • Could then do this for India, for the U.S.

    DI_20150711 035809 SIEYP ChrisKennedy PowerCostsUnderERI

    The go back to industrial symbiosis

    DI_20150711 035851 SIEYP ChrisKennedy InteractionsBetweenInfrastructureSectors

    [Questions]

    Save steel by not building rails, but what about other energy storage technologies?

    • That’s for you to research
    • To be done
    • Fast high speed rail is sustainable, supported by electricity
    • Coal and steam engines are intensive

    What about the U.S.?

    • As 4 to 5 years ago, 45% of rail tonnage is coal
    • It’s mature, shrinking rather than growing
     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33 other followers