Deathbird Stories & The God Engines

Deathbird Stories (1973) by Harlan Ellison is a changed my life set of short stories that Neil Gaiman credits at the end of the American Gods.  The book starts as follows:

Caveat Lector

It is suggested that the reader not attempt to read this book at one sitting. The emotional content of these stories, taken without break, may be extremely upsetting. This note is intended most sincerely, and not as hyperbole.

H.E.

“The Deathbird“, the last story in the book, is now my favorite fiction short story (and not just because it quotes Nietzsche wholesale).

The God Engines (2009) by John Scalzi is a fair trade novella in the same vein as Deathbird Stories.

It was interesting to read both at the same time, primarily as it showed how exceptional I found Ellison’s writing.

In every one of the higher religions, there is a strain of infinite optimism on the one hand and on the other, a profound pessimism. In the depths of our being, they all teach there is an inner light, but an inner light which our egotism keeps, for most of the time, in a state of more or less complete eclipse. If, however, it so desires, the ego can get out of the way, so to speak, can dis-eclipse the light and become identified with its divine source, hence the unlimited optimism of the traditional religions. Their pessimism springs from the observed fact that though all are called, few are chosen for the sufficient reason that few choose to be chosen [bold mine].

To me, this older conception of man’s nature and destiny seems more realistic, more nearly in accord with the given facts than any form of modern utopianism. In the Lord’s Prayer, we are taught to ask for the blessing, which consists in not being led into temptation. The reason is only too obvious. When temptations are very great or unduly prolonged, most persons succumb to them. To devise a perfect social order is probably beyond our powers, but I believe that it is perfectly possible for us to reduce the number of dangerous temptations to a level far below that which is tolerated at the present time. A society so arranged that there shall be a minimum of dangerous temptations—this is the end towards which, as a citizen, I have to strive.

In my efforts to achieve that end, I can make use of a great variety of means. Do good ends justify the use of intrinsically bad means? On the level of theity, the point can be argued indefinitely. In practice, meanwhile, I find that the means employed invariably determine the nature of the end achieved. Indeed, as Mahatma Gandhi was never tired of insisting, the means are the end in its preliminary stages.

Men have put forth enormous efforts to make their world a better place to live in. But except in regard to gadgets, plumbing, and hygiene, their success has been pathetically small. Hell, as the proverb has it, is paved with good intentions. And so long as we go on trying to realize our ideals by bad or merely inappropriate means, our good intentions will come to the same bad ends. In this consists the tragedy and the irony of history. Can I, as an individual, do anything to make future history a little less tragic and less ironic than history past, and present? I believe I can. As a citizen, I can use all my intelligence and all my goodwill to develop political means that shall be of the same kind and quality as the ideal ends which I am trying to achieve. And as a person, as a psychophysical organism, I can learn how to get out of the way so that the divine source of my life and consciousness can come out of eclipse and shine through me.

From: http://bit.ly/cD0edL

There’s still a functionality gap right now, but there is no technical reason that mobile web apps won’t catch up. And when they do, all the advantages of being able to target multiple platforms with one codebase, all the advantages of sharing a single stack between desktop web and the mobile web, and all the advantages of HTML5 itself, will push the balance back in favor of the web.

Incidentally, the browser is already my most-used app on my Android device, but I may be an early adopter / leading indicator rather than the norm.)

Native mobile apps may be bigger and better than mobile web apps today, but they won’t be tomorrow.

Mark my words.

We’ve seen this all before.

I mostly agree with DeWitt; it is very difficult for native platforms to stay ahead of the “Web platform” (such as it is) over the long term.

But the operative phase in the above is “long term”…

One of the key factors at play between native and Web platforms is access to new hardware capabilities.

The Web platform catches up eventually (note all the mobile hardware device support in “HTML5″), but the native platform will always have “first mover advantage” to give developers access to these capabilities.

In short, the most innovative apps leveraging new hardware will be written to the native platform.

Of course, a device vendor could adopt the Web platform as their native platform (read WebOS), but apps written to this platform are not really a Web app as defined by Dewitt or as I would define it (Web app ~= works on > 1 OS && > 1 browser).

Also note, that you even see Palm creating a native platform layer for developers (mainly for games).

When Apple releases the iPhone 5 with the iNeuron connector kit, I envision the following sequence playing out:

1. Apple releases the “Cocoa Thought” framework that you can program in Objective-C
2. In 6-12 months, Apple will have Javascript/HTML extensions that work in Safari only
3. In N months, some of the other mobile browser vendors support a variant of #2
4. In N+24 months, the W3C, IETF or some other standards body agree on some variant of #3
5. The neuron interface is now part of the “Web platform”

Net:  Hardware matters.  Native apps will support new hardware sooner.  Ergo, native apps will continue to be important.

I do think that the most apps will be Web apps, but native apps are like waves cresting over that vast ocean.

One day, while Nasreddin was visiting the capital city, the Sultan took offense to a joke that was made at his expense.

He had Nasreddin immediately arrested and imprisoned; accusing him of heresy and sedition.

Nasreddin apologized to the Sultan for his joke, and begged for his life; but the Sultan remained obstinate, and in his anger, sentenced Nasreddin to be beheaded the following day.

When Nasreddin was brought out the next morning, he addressed the Sultan, saying “Oh Sultan, live forever! You know me to be a skilled teacher, the greatest in your kingdom. If you will but delay my sentence for one year, I will teach your favorite horse to sing.”

The Sultan did not believe that such a thing was possible; but his anger had cooled, and he was amused by the audacity of Nasreddin’s claim.

“Very well,” replied the Sultan, “you will have a year. But if by the end of that year you have not taught my favorite horse to sing, then you will wish you had been beheaded today.”

That evening, Nasreddin’s friends were allowed to visit him in prison, and found him in unexpected good spirits. “How can you be so happy?” they asked, ”Do you really believe that you can teach the Sultan’s horse to sing?”

“Of course not,” replied Nasreddin, “but I now have a year which I did not have yesterday; and much can happen in that time. The Sultan may come to repent of his anger, and release me. He may die in battle or of illness, and it is traditional for a successor to pardon all prisoners upon taking office. He may be overthrown by another faction, and again, it is traditional for prisoners to be released at such a time. Or the horse may die, in which case the Sultan will be obliged to release me.”

“Finally,” said Nasreddin, “even if none of those things come to pass, perhaps the horse can sing.”

This variant from http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Nasrudin.

| aString aNumber aBoolean anObject |

“Assigning values to variables”

aString := ‘HelloWorld’.

“Sending a unary message”

aNumber := aString size.

“Sending a binary message”

aNumber := aNumber + 0.

“Sending a keyword message”

aBoolean := aNumber isDivisibleBy: 2.

“Writing the all important ‘Hello World’”

Transcript show: aString.

“Working with loops, conditionals and blocks”

aBoolean ifTrue: [ Transcript show: 'even' ] ifFalse: [ Transcript show: 'odd' ].

1 to: aString size do: [:number | Transcript show: (aString at: number) ].

[ aBoolean ] whileTrue: [ Transcript show: 'looping'. aBoolean:= false ].

“Creating a class. Notice that this is keyword message to Object. The IDE makes this look better.”

Object subclass: #Person

instanceVariableNames: ‘name’

classVariableNames: ”

poolDictionaries: ”

category: ‘Samples’.

“Adding two methods. Note the use of the ‘^’ to return from a method. The IDE makes this look better.”

Person compile: ‘name

^name’.

Person compile: ‘name: aString

name := aString’.

“Creating an instance of an object”

anObject := Person new.

“Calling our methods”

anObject name: ‘Bodhidharma’.

Transcript show: anObject name.

“Removing the reference to the object. Not needed, but I wanted to show nil.”

anObject := nil.

“Everything in this post is valid Smalltalk.  You can download Squeak (http://www.squeak.org) and run it without changing anything.  I left out a few things, but this should be enough to get you going with the world’s greatest language.”

Paint by numbers.
Exchange hollow greetings with someone who’ll do the same.
Smile appropriately for the right kinds of people,
with the right kinds of capital, financial or social.

Craft your character, rehearse your performance.
See which you sells the best and reinforce habits.
Walk to the altar, read from the prompter,
smile for your picture, and clap like a seal.

Is everyone looking at me?
Are they nodding their heads in approval?
Does this convince you? It never convinced me… it never convinced me.

Years don’t teach anything if you’re not listening…
or plugging your ears with bargain priced fantasies that are cheap to adopt,
but will surely break down right when you need a real understanding.

Choreography. Don’t think critically.
It’s all been figured out for you, and nothing means anything.

Is everyone looking at me?
Are they nodding their heads in approval?
Does this convince you? It never convinced me… it never convinced me.

I can tell you the Dharma, the history, etc. I can tell you all about zazen. I even practice it from time to time. I have all the books, videos, audiobooks, you name it. If it has the word “Buddha” on it I likely own it.

Has it helped me or those around me?  Absolutely not.

I still suffer.  I cause suffering.  I do not reduce suffering when I can.

Does this mean that Buddhism is false?  That I have been deluding myself in an attempt to flee Christianity?

No.  You see, I am hypocrite.

I know the doctrine and techniques, but it is not part of who I am, just another mask that I put on when it is convenient.

I even go so far to use my philosophical understanding of Buddhism and other traditions to excuse my own failings.

I drink, eat meat, foster conflict, etc. — all causing suffering to myself and others (which in Buddhism is the same thing).

In short, I know the Four Noble Truths, but do not follow the Eightfold Path.

But like so many of us that look into the proverbial mirror, I want to be true to my ideals, but the reflection tells a different tale.

I have joined the ranks of the other religious and philosophical hypocrites (I suppose this makes me human and an adult).

This is my catharsis (κάθαρσις) and I hope an epiphany (in a Greek sense, not Joyce):

Beings are numberless, I vow to save them
Desires are inexhaustible, I vow to end them
Dharma gates are boundless, I vow to enter them
Buddha’s way is unsurpassable, I vow to become it.

I will fail again, but I am committed to self-surpassing (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Chapter 34):

And this secret spake Life herself unto me. “Behold,” said she, “I am that which must surpass itself again and again.”

Judging from my notes in the book, I got through about 80% of Quicksilver (The Baroque Cycle, Vol. 1) the first time I attempted to read it.

I don’t recall why I didn’t finish, but I have a good idea — I have book attention deficit.

While I am still making progress on Quicksilver, I read three different books on Greek and Jewish religion this past week:

• Dionysos: Good survey of Dionysos over the centuries, inclusive of Nietzsche, but it was a little preachy at the end around the potential of the Dionysiac to help with modern consumerism.
• Ancient Greek Religion:  Really enjoyed this overview of the Greek religion (largely from the point of a view of an Athenian).  Hit the main mystery-cults I was aware of in reasonable detail.
• The Gnostic Gospels of Jesus:  I have read this before if memory serves (during the development of “Indigo“).  The Gospel of Thomas is still my favorite (reminds me of a proto-Jefferson Bible).

Was there anything that bound these books together for me (beyond the obvious category of religion)?

Yes.

It is ignorance that is the cause of our downfall and suffering.

Religions can be (but often are not) a tool to address this ignorance; to remind us of our interconnectedness and reliance on nature/each other.

Nevertheless, religion is often used to separate.

Science fairs no better in this respect, should you think it is the “one true path”.

Science (actually Scientism) often dismisses the utility of ritual, myth, and religion in mediating the relationship of the individual to the greater whole.

That all said, one of these days, I am going to complete the The Baroque Cycle.

I have tried various recommendations, all of which have failed to ignite the level of understanding and interest that I believe this author is due.

I am going to try a new approach moving forward and I thought I would share it here as well.

In short, buy On Nietzsche (Wadsworth Philosophers Series).

It is 88 pages long.  It costs ~$16.00.

It contains the best summary I have read of Nietzsche’s views on key philosophical concepts.

It is simple, it is fast and you will come away understanding Nietzsche’s philosopy in enough detail to 1) decide if you want to read further 2) have a somewhat educated opinion on his views.

It is something that I take very seriously and not something I have chosen to “outsource” to some existing religious or ethical system.

I have studied and/or practiced most of the major religions and ethical systems.

I find them mostly wanting for my children (and myself).

Above all things, I want my child to understand that they are the “value creator”.

If anyone has the power or authority to create what is “good” and “evil” it is them.

If you hear Nietzsche, you are more than correct.

I have yet to meet someone or a system with a monopoly on the truth, much less systems formed before the advent of the science (not that science is without flaws).

Most of my personal struggles have been brought about by me trying to break out of chains (of truth, no less) imposed by other men and society.

As Blake says: “I must Create a System, or be enslav’d by another Man’s”.

I still continue this struggle daily and my greatest desire is that my children do not repeat my struggles and failures (I will fail).

The challenge is how to create a meta-system that forms a mutable foundation in which they can develop their own “value creation” muscles.

I have given them a set of “starter” axioms that form a motto that we repeat from time to time: Live, Love, Learn, Create.

You may think that this is close to the philosophia perennis (”perennial philosophy”) and therefore influenced by most of the systems that I disparage.

I can offer no other, for we are all creatures of our context.

That said, the key value is creation, particularly the creation of the unexpected, born of both Apollo and Dionysus, transforming what is old into the new.

I enjoyed the conference, particularly doing the keynote with Bob Muglia and the “Open Data for the Open Web” session with Jonathan Carter.

One of the things that we announced in our session was some work that we have been doing with Facebook:  the Insights OData Service.

Facebook Insights provides FB application developers and page authors access to a wealth of information about how FB users interact with their applications and pages.

We started working with Facebook just before F8 on an implementation that would bring this dataset into the OData ecosystem.

Our primary goal is to make this information accessible in a first class way within Microsoft’s BI tools, like Excel.

TechEd seemed like a good place to talk about our progress to date.

The service is still in “preview” mode, as we are still adding features and we are likely to change the URL, etc.

Nevertheless, if you have a Facebook application or page, I encourage you to check it out.

As a Smalltalker, I had a tremendous amount of respect for his work, but I was completely blown away by him and his presentation (all done in Squeak).

He chastised us (Microsoft and the industry) for all the unfulfilled promise that he had outlined years before.  We deserved it.

Alan turned 70 on May 17.

His friends and co-workers (including Gordon Bell, Chuck Thacker, and Butler Lampson) have written him a book.

It is available online (donations welecome) at http://vpri.org/pov/

It is worth reading.

We still have a lot of work to do.

Once upon a time a developer went to a conference called Google I/O.

The first day was great, lots for conversations with smart folks.

On the second day, the developer realized that they forgot their badge at home during the 40 minute drive to the conference.

Not to worry or turn around, the developer thought. Just like all the conferences the developer had attended before, with proper ID they will surely let him in.

Arriving at the event, the developer walked to the help desk.

Developer: “Please help. I left my badge at home and I need a new one.”

Google: “Sorry, we cannot help you, our systems do not support printing two badges.”

The developer asked for someone else, and then someone else and then someone else.  Finally, the developer got to someone that seemed like they could make something happen.

Developer: “Who do you need to hear from in order to let me in the conference? If you got an email from [unnamed Google executive] would that do it?”

Google: “You can do whatever you like, we won’t help you.”

The developer was somewhat upset at this point. Not only did the “system limitation” make no technical sense, but Google seemed to forget that the developer spent money to attend the conference, that the developer likely talked to lots of other developers; they seemed to forget that customers, particularly developers matter.

The developer knew some Google folks at the I/O, so he sent some email and made a call.

The developer got a response quickly. This Google employee was helpful (you know who you are) and told the developer what might work to get him in the conference without driving for another 80 minutes.

The developer went back in the conference with this new information. The developer talked to one person and then another and then another — finally to reach someone that really worked for Google and had the authority to make something happen.

Developer: “I talked to [unnamed, but helpful Google employee].  They told me if I showed you my confirmation letter, you may be able to let me in the conference.”

Google: “Nope. He should know better. I am going to call him.”

Google goes off to call unnamed (but helpful) Google employee.  Google can’t get in touch with unnamed (but helpful) employee, comes back and says “Left him a voice mail, but I can’t print you a badge.”

Developer: “Why not?”

Google: “Our systems cannot print out two badges.”

Developer: “Ok. Write my name on a piece of paper and put it in the holder.”

Google: “No.”

Developer: “So, I need to drive back to Silicon Valley? Really?”

Google: “I have sent people back to Holland for forgetting their badges.”

The above line was said with pride. Really. Now, the developer suspected that it was said with the sort of pride one feels when they are trying to show their power in a conversation, not with the pride of being malicious toward someone intentionally, but that is a nuance thing.

Developer: “What if [unnamed Google executive] forgot their badge?”

Google: “[unnamed Google executive] would not forget their badge.”

The developer loved this response. Google was basically calling him an idiot, which clearly he was for forgetting his badge, but more so because the developer believed that a company like Google that wanted to attract developers to their platform (or to work at their company) would never treat attendees this way.

Developer: “Ok, I see how it is going to be, but I don’t understand. What are you trying to prevent?”

Google: “It is against our policy.”

Developer: “But why?”

Google: “I can’t have our conference staff printing out badges all the time for people that forget.”

Developer (motioning to all the conference staff just sitting around): “There are lot of folks doing nothing, can’t one of them do it?”

Google: “No.”

Developer: “Is there anything we can do?”

Google: “You can call one of your friends at Google and use their badge. Or you can get someone else you know to give you their badge.”

Developer: “Really? Doesn’t that defeat the whole point of badges?”

Google: “No.”

The developer was very confused at this stage, but he was an idiot, so you would suspect that.

Developer: “Ok, I have a workaround, but it doesn’t make any sense, I really want to confirm that I can get anyone’s badge and just walk in.”

Google: “Yes, everyone is doing it.”

The developer keep wondering if this violated the policy too. That logical flaw didn’t seem to trouble Google. The developer wondered what would happen if every attendee gave their badge to a homeless person on the street during lunch time. Would Google think that was ok?

The developer shook the hand of Google. Thanked them. Walked away.

You can draw your own conclusions from this story. It is only one-side. I am sure Google would have a different take, but the developer will not be attending I/O again (save perhaps to organize that badge swap with the needy of San Francisco).

Update:

The above was a summary.  For example, I saw Scoble during these events and actually used him as an example to ensure that I understood the badge swaping process.  In addition, I accepted my defeat (although I had several offers to use others badges), went home and back (80 minutes exactly), so I could get my hands on the HTC phone.  It is a fairly interesting device.

Thanks to the Google folks that have reached out to me as a result of this post.  Reaffirms my respect for most Google employees (I have many friends that work at Google).

I fully understand why they have this policy; to ensure that I didn’t give my badge to someone else.  There are lots of ways to check for that.  Further and most importantly, you need to start from a position of trust, particularly with a paying customer, especially in the tightly nit developer community.

We’ll be doing a keynote at the European VC Summit (Guy Kawasaki is the MC which I am excited about) and then it is off to Asia, TechEd US, and back to Europe.

We will be taping at least one of those events, which I will post here.

In the meantime, you can get the PDF (PPT is too big for WP to upload and I am too tired to SSH in to the server and fix it).

I often hear folks talk about 100k miles, but that is not all that tangible to me.

I was thinking that the circumference of the Earth (~40,000 kilometers/~25,000 miles) seems like a much better way to calibrate distance flown.

Two obvious names came to mind: Magellan or Eratosthenes.

Magellan it is.

It looks like I am going to end the year with around 4 magellans in the air.

How many magellans will you fly this year?

We wear a mask at work.  A mask that tells people we are serious, intelligent and worth whatever we are being paid (or more).

We wear a different mask when having drinks with our friends.  A mask where we want to be carefree, free from the weight of the mask worn at work.

We wear a different mask when we are all alone with our partner(s)/spouse(s).  A mask where we can sometime share our deepest desires and fears (and often a mask where we cannot).

We even wear a mask when we talk to ourselves.  The mask that says we are simultaneously both the greatest and worst person that has ever lived (the subject for a much longer post).

When I read about privacy on social networks, I can typically unwind the issue to really be about what projections of self (a mask) that the network supports.

Most only support a few masks (public and/or friends) and often poorly.  This causes people to “under share”, use a different network for that mask, or just opt-out completely.

An interesting observation is that these masks are often (roughly) organized in a subset/superset relationship.

This observation could help make this problem more tractable, although I do believe that a network needs to enable the same level of control that I have today — essentially the ability to construct a mask for each individual in the network.

I could spend several years talking about why these masks exist in the first place (religious, cultural, biological, etc.), but social networks like Facebook or Robert Scoble are not going to make them go away.

What we need is a social network that understands these masks and supports them in a first class way.

The first one that does will become the essessial platform (a utility) for the next generation of applications.

New York, NY – May 12, 2010
Chicago, IL – May 14, 2010
Mountain View, CA – May 18, 2010
Shanghai, China – June 1, 2010
Tokyo, Japan – June 3, 2010
Reading, United Kingdom – June 15, 2010
Paris, France – June 17, 2010

One full day of OData and Azure fun.

More details at http://www.odata.org/roadshow

See you there…

I just finished up his latest, Transition, on my new iPad 3G.

I hate saying this, but I want my money back.

I hate saying it, because I can imagine how hard to must be to write a book (I know quite a few authors), how hard it must be write a truly excellent book (which the author has done so many times), how hard it must be to get feedback like this after pouring so much energy into something (I hate when I get bad feedback about a talk or article).

Nevertheless, I must.

Banks clearly wants to condemn the Bush torture policy and the greed of Wall Street, but he does it in such a glaring way that it comes off as a talk-radio rant wrapped in a Sci-Fi novel.

I like my social commentary in subtle, nuance, artistic form within a novel (surprised?)

It was something that Banks did so well in many of Culture novels.

Further, I thought the torture induced powers of the main character to be too similar to Miles Teg in the last two Dune novels.

That was a further off putting.

I will say that Transitionhad a few interesting moments, the best example is an explanation of why aliens may choose to visit us.

Our moon is perfectly size for a total eclipse; perhaps the only place in the universe that you can see such a thing.

Yes, the aliens could come visit us for holiday.

I have not felt this way about a computer since I saw the Apple Lisa in the early 80s.

I remember going to the local Apple dealer after school countless times and just staring (I have no idea why they let me keep coming back) at the first GUI computer I had seen in person.

This iPad 3G instills that same feeling once again, across more than a generation.

Are there ample opportunities for improvement? Yes.

Could Apple be more ‘open’ with users and developers? Yes.

None of this changes the feeling that I have as I type on this device.

The feeling that I had when my daughter turned the page in iBook for the first time (you should have seen her face).

I think that is Apple’s real gift; they understand that it is about emotion, not specs or features.

My rating: Changed my life.

I tend to always be (re)reading something directly by him or something that is clearly influenced by him.

I found The Twilight of the Idols and The Anti-Christ: or How to Philosophize with a Hammer at a party at age 16 (I had an interesting mix of friends to say the least); I have been completely fascinated since.

Over the past few weeks, I have been rereading BGE (Beyond Good and Evil) with the help of a companion: Nietzsche’s Task: An Interpretation of Beyond Good and Evil.

It has been incredibly helpful and recommended if you really want to get beyond a fairly cursory understanding of BGE.

In particular, this has been a big help understanding how to cope with the death of “God” in modern Western society.

This is been a long personal struggle of mine; the depth of despair that you reach when you really comprehend the capriciousness and indifference of “nature”.

I am not talking about atheism and the lack of immortality or the triumph of science.

I am talking about understanding that our Western world view, values, culture, morality, etc. are based on some notion of “natural law” and in many cases some notion of progress/improvement.

I am talking about the death of something more powerful than the death of “God”, the death of teleology.

Nietzsche provides the best answer that I have yet found to this struggle and Nietzsche’s Task: An Interpretation of Beyond Good and Evil is a great help in understanding it better.

My rating:  Changed my life.