NavigationUser loginSyndicate
|
March 2007 MeetingMarch 2007 Web414 Meeting — Thursday, March 8th, 2007 — 7pm
MSOE Student Organization Conference Room (3rd Floor of Campus Center) Directions to the room are as follows.
This will be our first meeting at MSOE, and since it's happening the week after BarCampMadison, we thought it would be good to review what we learned there. We should have a lot more room (and a projector) at MSOE, so invite your friends...
|
SearchUpcoming eventsElsewhereActive forum topicsWho's new
|
Good gathering and meeting space
Pete & crew, I thought the MSOE meeing went well, and I liked MSOE student center as the meeting space. Feels like our group of members is starting to gel, which is great to see.
I was thinking at the next meeting we might try to plan a more structured meeting time, possibly split into 1/3 web design discussion, 1/3 web development discussion and 1/3 general free for all discussion.
Last night I had the idea to maybe have people come to the laptop and show sites they've found helpful/interesting and why. This could be services, information or even sites we've built, shring how we solved problems, etc.
For instance, Pete, you could show how the lightbox.js works by showing how you used it on the Motorwest site.
What do you all think?
Structure
Mike, I agree, we should have more structure. Let's discuss it more, perhaps in the forums, or email, whatever works. I'd be happy to do a short talk on Lightbox JS next time.
technology
One thought I had a few times during barcamp is "why is a technical solution always so appealing?" I feel like we sometime use technology as a layer of abstraction over our problems. We try to use technology to solve a problem that would more effectively be solved by working on the flaws within ourselves.
Has anyone else ever thought about this? I would love to talk to you if so.
following the rules
i think we like technology because it seems to follow the rules once established. and so if the rules are fair, then the technology will treat people without prejudice. i think the definition of algorithms allows people to in a very straight forward way define what the rules are.
i find the most difficult technology to date to implement is always the technology that needs to work without set rules. the more define the social rules are the easier it is to design.
one of the reasons that i am so interested in neural networks, AI, and HAI (human like artificial intelligence) is that we might be able to one day design a system that observes us and finds out what the optimal process is with out having to think about it ourselves, yes i know you are all thinking skynet, 1984, etc... but what about star trek tooo. as long as it is fiction, it is just that, something to dream and fantasize about and i would rather dream of a world where we use technology to better ourselves rather than destroy ourselves over petty arguments.
i think that just like hammers, cement and any blunt object, we and use it to build a new tomorrow, but the mafia can also use it to wack you up the head, and bury you in the concrete with the fishes. i think sites like wikipedia prove that humanity will always be able to counter the "spammers and gamers" of the system that try to take advantage of the rules. i think that wikipedia also proves that small groups require less management per person than massive groups of people do.
Design
One theory in the world of create design is that it's much easier to work withing a set of constraints and come up with something than it is for someone to say "do whatever you want!"
Setting limitations allows for people to push to the very edge of those limitations, but know that there are boundaries to work within. The challenge then becomes "How creative can I be while staying inside of this box" rather than, do whatever the hell you want, which is another way of saying "there are no guidelines at all" (That may best describe the art vs. design issue...)
Also listed at
planyp.us, Upcoming.org, Facebook...