An Anthro-Bio-Chemist, Ott has botanically observed hundreds, perhaps thousands of plants that yield varying amounts of altered states, from a library and research lab in Mexico, recently damaged by arson. For proof of his studies, check out Pharmacotheon. He analyzes many chemical forms, shows inferior paths, and discusses policy and history. Footnotes tell the real story, and are half the size of each chapter. Continuing Gordon Wasson's unusual and maybe ground-breaking constructions of ancient ceremonies utilizing medicinal tools that altered users, Ott writes the only ethnopharmacogosy of entheogenic drugs. A chemical zoom lens into the brain. Volume 2 is delayed, but Volume 1 is a must have.
Zenon Pylyshyn, Cognitive Scientist, who's discovered rotational aspects of the cortex's way of 'seeing' perhaps even how memories are anchored.
Why is this important? It may be a key to building the first conscious language, which may in-turn unlock the brain's full capabilities.
See: Seeing and Visualizing, It's Not What You Think. Winner, Best ABA Scholarly Book, 2003
Below: Gobors have dual rotational lines, column a are snapshots every 250ms. They illustrate human 'objectification' in motion and space.
Some think 300ms is the human 'shutter' rate.
SAT reading scores for graduating high school seniors this year reached the lowest point in nearly four decades, reflecting a steady decline in performance in that subject on the college admissions test, the College Board reported Wednesday.
How does the most computerized and wired country steadily fade its text-prose users? Answer: They're consuming images instead of the written word, 90% of it junk data, repetetive recycling, loops made as two-hour flicks or 60 minute shows looped within with 30 second spots. That's where the next divide is, in the visuals. Imagine a visual SAT. How would we score these days? Not so well probably. And so far we've only gotten to the Edison stage of this century's game with Steve Jobs. Now we need the Edwin S. Porters, the Chaplins, the Ub Iwerks of the 21st century, to put this technology to use. Ready?
The U.S. is statistically riddled with anxiety, depression, panic, according to the pharmaceutical and medical industries, and the figures grow annually. Can there be 10x as many afflicted in the U.S. than in other nations? 3x more than the rest of the developed world? Statistically impossible, but not if you're working for pharma. The key problem is pain is a necessary component to life. Hiding its aftermath inside a drug means there is no growth, no awareness and what follows improper, biological processing of pain is incessant fear. This process has been evolving for hundreds of millions of years, why cover it with a blanket.
While analysts and pundits will be debating the retirement of the PC revolution's co-inventor, few will examine carefully Jobs's strategy for Apple. What most see is the tip of the iceberg, its hardware, its elegant physicality, visionary ergonomics from the future. Tangible depreciables. But the real master's hand can be seen and felt in the software that bridges all of its formats within and its eventual goals to port into everything not yet Apple. Apple has only begun to license its vision.
Several months ago, James B. Stewart declared Apple's best days over, yet he spoke only of devices, and he missed the key point then as others will today:
In the WSJ, Jame B. Stewart, author and investor, raved about his Apple shares while he predicted its best days were nearing their end. Don't bet on it, James. While Stewart waxed about his AirBook and iPad that collects too many fingerprints and his forthcoming Verizon iPhone 4, he follows them with competitors' pipeline press releases and mentions his Kindle, hinting he's reached his Mac plateau and doesn't see a long-term future for the new century's key corporation. What James B. Stewart doesn't seem to know is that Apple's true reach is not merely its hardware. He's dazzled by it like we all are, but this entrancement hides the real source of Apple's success: the secret sauce is ALL about code. Jobs, before he returned to roost at the company he founded in Steve Wozniak's garage, developed one of the most crucial pieces of software in history, NeXT, a highly stable operating system he wrote in UNIX, and once in place back at Apple, ported the NeXT OS to mutate the Mac's OS (saving it from a certain Mac-doom in the form of Scully's Copland OS). And once he stabilized the new OS, began carefully acquiring and developing software for his new version of the "unified box." The reinvention of the Mac in 1996 was sleight-of-hand, what Jobs did was actually invent a new machine with similar properties to his earlier 1984 Mac. And that wasn't all she wrote. Now, take a look at the software Apple's arrayed for its machine and you might get the picture that James B. Stewart is lacking FinalCut, Logic Studio's audio suite, and the now discontinued Shake, which will be slowly adapted into FinalCut and offer prosumers IMAX depth effects (here are sketches of co-inventor Rob Brinkmann's penned Shake eurekas, software used in a majority of blockbuster films). His strategy is as naked as can be, he's trying to bridge the gap between professional and consumer in media. His 2700 dollar machine ably competing with a Flame machine that costs 375 an hour to rent. By fusing media's transformation inside a near supercomputer that sits on a desktop, he plots one day to see an 18 year old's imax 3-D short open before a Pixar 300 mil mega-90minute. Uploaded that afternoon. Steve Jobs's visionary pursuit of software will be altering our languages for decades to come and his pundits merely talk about hardware. Talk about a lack of vision.
Having shunned sci-fi for decades, Ridley Scott, an early innovator of the form, returns to it after some less than stellar outings (A Good Year, Robin Hood). The question is why. The answer is simple: $$; adult themes no longer command budgets. What studio will spend 90 million to watch Russell Crowe eat escargot these days. The only way for Mr. Scott to make his now standard 7 million fee is to finally return to the genre he avoided after 1983. The Tentpole cash-cow forces him to switch late in career to reboot his first success (Alien) and his only masterpiece (Blade Runner) that tanked in summer 1982. The contraction of the spot business no doubt contributes to his decision. Beware (imagine Welles rebooting Kane in 1969). Blade Runner was a film that suffered two budgetary collapses, tiring difficult night shoots and the removal of half of its scripted miniature sequences (it has only twelve, extremely well paced sequences that match seemlessly with the surroundings). Its unplanned austerity gave 80's baroqueness a haunted quality difficult to duplicate, and a style irrelevant in today's aesthetic: it's fashion now.
Must be expensive? Very.