Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Options

Exponential Azimuth

John expressed the desire for Azimuth to grow exponentially. There's quite a lot we might discuss about this. Let me start with a very minor point, and maybe get to more important issues another day.

I think video is likely to be an important mechanism for communication. Consider this really wonderful presentation. Then compare the Post Carbon Institute's attempt in the same style. In the latter the abrupt transitions are surprisingly annoying, but more importantly the message is very muddled and the glow of optimism at the end comes over as completely fake. Note that I'm not saying I agree with the first, just that it is compellingly presented.

• Options
1.
edited June 2011

When I get back to Riverside in the fall of 2012, I'll start a seminar on math and energy/environmental issues. I could have it videotaped and make the videos available. They wouldn't be very polished, but I'm considered an exciting speaker (at least by the low standards of academia), so they might be a way to get more people interested in what we're trying to do here.

By then I will know better exactly what we're trying to do here. I have one more year sit around, think, and figure that out.

In the next year I want to apply for several NSF grants, to help fund grad students and postdocs. These people could do all sorts of useful work such as making videos, working on the Azimuth Wiki, etcetera. I've been looking for grants that are suitable to me, here:

If anyone wants to help, that'd be great. Unfortunately there isn't a special grant category for "mathematicians who want to quit pure math and save the planet". However, the category mathematical physics includes:

fundamental quantum theory, quantum field theory, string theory, nonlinear dynamics, fluid mechanics, turbulence, chaos and complexity, and statistical physics.

I think some of the last fields may be relevant.

Of course there are also grants far from "mathematical physics", and I'll try to apply for some of those too. But since I'm known best as a mathematical physicist, it seems wise to apply for a grant along those lines as well.

Comment Source:When I get back to Riverside in the fall of 2012, I'll start a seminar on math and energy/environmental issues. I could have it videotaped and make the videos available. They wouldn't be very polished, but I'm considered an exciting speaker (at least by the low standards of academia), so they might be a way to get more people interested in what we're trying to do here. By then I will know better exactly what we're trying to do here. I have one more year sit around, think, and figure that out. In the next year I want to apply for several NSF grants, to help fund grad students and postdocs. These people could do all sorts of useful work such as making videos, working on the Azimuth Wiki, etcetera. I've been looking for grants that are suitable to me, here: * [NSF funding](http://www.nsf.gov/funding/). If anyone wants to help, that'd be great. Unfortunately there isn't a special grant category for "mathematicians who want to quit pure math and save the planet". However, the category [mathematical physics](http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=503537&org=MPS&from=home) includes: > fundamental quantum theory, quantum field theory, string theory, nonlinear dynamics, fluid mechanics, turbulence, chaos and complexity, and statistical physics. I think some of the last fields may be relevant. Of course there are also grants far from "mathematical physics", and I'll try to apply for some of those too. But since I'm known best as a mathematical physicist, it seems wise to apply for a grant along those lines as well.
• Options
2.

Kirk Sorensen is an engaging speaker, and he seems to have discovered a sort of video Boswell. See his blog post. It uses a number of cameras, then editing afterwards to pick between them, or pick from the slides. I'd actually recommend watching the long talk given at protospace. Note that the first four minutes are a highlights package from the rest. I feel that it should be possible to combine this with the hypnotic emphasis you get from seeing the spoken words appearing in text, though that might only work for a carefully scripted talk, which might then, as a result, fail to work as a talk. There are some interesting bits in the talk. Kirk's experience with the weird idea of beaming solar energy from space has perhaps something to say about the way our funding model for Science might sometimes have a negative effect on the quality of the result.

Comment Source:Kirk Sorensen is an engaging speaker, and he seems to have discovered a sort of video Boswell. See [his blog post](http://energyfromthorium.com/2011/06/04/adventures-with-gordon/). It uses a number of cameras, then editing afterwards to pick between them, or pick from the slides. I'd actually recommend watching the long talk given at protospace. Note that the first four minutes are a highlights package from the rest. I feel that it should be possible to combine this with the hypnotic emphasis you get from seeing the spoken words appearing in text, though that might only work for a carefully scripted talk, which might then, as a result, fail to work as a talk. There are some interesting bits in the talk. Kirk's experience with the weird idea of beaming solar energy from space has perhaps something to say about the way our funding model for Science might sometimes have a negative effect on the quality of the result.
• Options
3.

I think it is important to understand some relevant aspects of human nature. When someone told Churchill that "by 2050 women will rule the world" he said "Still?". The point is that women are the meta-rulers of the world. They decide the rules of the game, men try to win. Even when it seems that men are persecuting women, this is an aspect of female power struggles. Nobody comes home from persecuting rebellious females to the disapproval of their mother, wife and sister. Keeping females uneducated suits high status females: it keeps female status as hereditary rather than meritocratic. However it results in poor meta leadership from the female half of the population. That is why female education is the key to so many human problems. I don't think this is any different. Female disinterest in Science and Mathematics means that they have poor skills for evaluating the conflicting messages coming their way. One needs to be careful about exciting fear about resource shortages among women. There is a genetic reflex for women to send men off to war in such circumstances (and we cynically note that in the primitive circumstances where this reflex arose, the women themselves were only in danger of being captured, not killed if their side lost).

On the other side, male reflexes are heavily influenced by the dangers of being killed in internal or external power struggles. The adult sex ratio in primitive circumstances is often 2:1. I think it is fair to say that men are only going to be overly concerned about saving the world when there is a female push. And there is, but not quite as well informed as we would wish. An important aim is to put that on a firm footing. One of the things that makes humanity so effective is that men compete by cooperating. The women reward male cooperativeness, and are interested in the meritocratic struggle even when they don't understand it. It should be said that women can fit into the male hierarchy anywhere, including the top. Men, by contrast, are excluded from female status. I also note that a standard male type is the tech expert: he knows stuff (or pretends to) and he tends to stay away from fights and chasing girls, but a girl will catch him if he can find a niche. This type is heavily represented in Science and Engineering, and is indeed the driving force behind modern civilization.

My next missive will propose a plan based on these ideas.

Comment Source:I think it is important to understand some relevant aspects of human nature. When someone told Churchill that "by 2050 women will rule the world" he said "Still?". The point is that women are the meta-rulers of the world. They decide the rules of the game, men try to win. Even when it seems that men are persecuting women, this is an aspect of female power struggles. Nobody comes home from persecuting rebellious females to the disapproval of their mother, wife and sister. Keeping females uneducated suits high status females: it keeps female status as hereditary rather than meritocratic. However it results in poor meta leadership from the female half of the population. That is why female education is the key to so many human problems. I don't think this is any different. Female disinterest in Science and Mathematics means that they have poor skills for evaluating the conflicting messages coming their way. One needs to be careful about exciting fear about resource shortages among women. There is a genetic reflex for women to send men off to war in such circumstances (and we cynically note that in the primitive circumstances where this reflex arose, the women themselves were only in danger of being captured, not killed if their side lost). On the other side, male reflexes are heavily influenced by the dangers of being killed in internal or external power struggles. The adult sex ratio in primitive circumstances is often 2:1. I think it is fair to say that men are only going to be overly concerned about saving the world when there is a female push. And there is, but not quite as well informed as we would wish. An important aim is to put that on a firm footing. One of the things that makes humanity so effective is that men compete by cooperating. The women reward male cooperativeness, and are interested in the meritocratic struggle even when they don't understand it. It should be said that women can fit into the male hierarchy anywhere, including the top. Men, by contrast, are excluded from female status. I also note that a standard male type is the tech expert: he knows stuff (or pretends to) and he tends to stay away from fights and chasing girls, but a girl will catch him if he can find a niche. This type is heavily represented in Science and Engineering, and is indeed the driving force behind modern civilization. My next missive will propose a plan based on these ideas.
• Options
4.

Here's the plan. Note that I'll talk as if the people in our investigation teams are male, but actually we want women in there. More than 30% might not work well, but I don't think that is likely to be a problem.

Azimuth is going to be the greatest show on youtube: solving the world's problem's by understanding them, and understanding the options and presenting the results in a clear and compelling and educational way.

Well actually I wrote a plan (available on application), but it is a bit convoluted. A key aim is to reward people who do good stuff with promotions, honours, prizes, reputation points, and make a fuss about it. This would be combined in some way (perhaps in an introductory section ) with Azimuth's actual output (such as videos explaining stuff). Clearly if there is exponential growth then there have to be an increasing number of teams and an increasingly complex system for evaluating participants. At the bottom level there have to be open forums where the general public can air their knowledge and skill (and/or ignorance): this being one of the ways of finding new team members (and new members of the evaluation team) .

The point is to generate educational material, aimed 50% at female education, and reward the team workers by giving them acknowledgements (which will clearly reach that audience) by being recognized in the opening and closing credits of the educational stuff.

For something that is going to grow exponentially you need scalable infrastructure. I doubt if the current system fits the bill, apart from the fact that it has some technical problems. A move to google infrastructure is now more practical: google docs has an equation editor which wouldn't do for nLab but might be ok for Azimuth. Google docs has recently added a discussion feature. Everything is integrated with youtube. There is also substantial programmability via App Engine and Apps Script. I also think that Google (perhaps through google.org) would be interested in this as a project showcasing google capabilities. I'm sure they've heard of John Baez, but it wouldn't hurt to go to them with some other people they know. If you get google on board I'm sure they will improve their math support. They might also provide computational infrastructure, and stuff, or even money, for prizes.

Comment Source:Here's the plan. Note that I'll talk as if the people in our investigation teams are male, but actually we want women in there. More than 30% might not work well, but I don't think that is likely to be a problem. Azimuth is going to be the greatest show on youtube: solving the world's problem's by understanding them, and understanding the options and presenting the results in a clear and compelling and educational way. Well actually I wrote a plan (available on application), but it is a bit convoluted. A key aim is to reward people who do good stuff with promotions, honours, prizes, reputation points, and make a fuss about it. This would be combined in some way (perhaps in an introductory section ) with Azimuth's actual output (such as videos explaining stuff). Clearly if there is exponential growth then there have to be an increasing number of teams and an increasingly complex system for evaluating participants. At the bottom level there have to be open forums where the general public can air their knowledge and skill (and/or ignorance): this being one of the ways of finding new team members (and new members of the evaluation team) . The point is to generate educational material, aimed 50% at female education, and reward the team workers by giving them acknowledgements (which will clearly reach that audience) by being recognized in the opening and closing credits of the educational stuff. For something that is going to grow exponentially you need scalable infrastructure. I doubt if the current system fits the bill, apart from the fact that it has some technical problems. A move to google infrastructure is now more practical: google docs has an equation editor which wouldn't do for nLab but might be ok for Azimuth. Google docs has recently added a discussion feature. Everything is integrated with youtube. There is also substantial programmability via App Engine and Apps Script. I also think that Google (perhaps through google.org) would be interested in this as a project showcasing google capabilities. I'm sure they've heard of John Baez, but it wouldn't hurt to go to them with some other people they know. If you get google on board I'm sure they will improve their math support. They might also provide computational infrastructure, and stuff, or even money, for prizes.
• Options
5.

Of course there would also be a communication team. It would create videos, documents, posters, audio podcasts, etc. It would give Azimuth a presence on twitter, facebook and all that stuff. It would issue press releases and try to get stuff on TV (and pay TV is chronically short of material, so that shouldn't be hard). "Azimuth the Movie" would be a major background project.

Comment Source:Of course there would also be a communication team. It would create videos, documents, posters, audio podcasts, etc. It would give Azimuth a presence on twitter, facebook and all that stuff. It would issue press releases and try to get stuff on TV (and pay TV is chronically short of material, so that shouldn't be hard). "Azimuth the Movie" would be a major background project.
• Options
6.

I have stalled making a couple of videos, something I wanted from start because they are easy to make and store either on youtube or vimeo.com, I have postboned linking to the because I want it to be more like embedded videos.

I think Curtis was starting a thread on examples of simple animations with similar requirements.

But this must be easy to add to Instiki?

Comment Source:I have stalled making a couple of videos, something I wanted from start because they are easy to make and store either on youtube or vimeo.com, I have postboned linking to the because I want it to be more like embedded videos. I think Curtis was starting a thread on examples of simple animations with similar requirements. But this must be easy to add to Instiki?
• Options
7.
edited October 2012

We could start local chapters of the Azimuth group.

All of these information-based connections are Great. Yet I haven't really met any of you, and it goes without saying that there is nothing an in-person meeting.

Since I live in the New York City area, that is what comes to mind now. There surely are a lot of folks here who care about our environmental concerns, who would be interested in learning more about the sciences, and who haven't found a creative outlet for these needs and interests.

Here are some ideas about organizing it, starting from the simplest:

1. We could have a coffee, for anyone who is in the area. Here, that would at least be me and Allan. Anyone else around this neck of the woods?

2. We could meet regularly, say every month, just to compare notes on what we are working on and thinking about. We could give practice talks.

3. Find an institutional host, for a series of informal colloquiums on Azimuth related topics. What we would be asking for a room for, say, 90 minutes, every quarter, and announcements of the talks. I'd be happy to give talks on any topic that I've been able to blog about (I have more in the pipeline, following my TO-DO list). If a talk runs too short, we could work through problem sets on the whiteboard. The premise would not be that this is advanced research, but that this is what we are learning about the sciences that can help save our planet. But with the aim of research in mind. The intended audience is the concerned and interested general public. There could be Strategy talks as well. If people are far away, there is always tele-conferencing. I think a university campus, with its espirit de corps, is a good setting for this. Something about Columbia strikes me as Azimuthal. Anyone have any high-level contacts there? There is the question of which department would be the most well-suited for this purpose.

4. This could be a starting point for further development in the direction of a lab. Eventually it would be great to have some Azimuth research centers.

But let's go back to step 1. Anyone in the NYC area up for a coffee, sometime in the next month?

Regarding the rest, I'll start by keeping a notebook.

Regards, Dave

Comment Source:We could start local chapters of the Azimuth group. All of these information-based connections are Great. Yet I haven't really met any of you, and it goes without saying that there is nothing an in-person meeting. Since I live in the New York City area, that is what comes to mind now. There surely are a lot of folks here who care about our environmental concerns, who would be interested in learning more about the sciences, and who haven't found a creative outlet for these needs and interests. Here are some ideas about organizing it, starting from the simplest: 1. We could have a coffee, for anyone who is in the area. Here, that would at least be me and Allan. Anyone else around this neck of the woods? 2. We could meet regularly, say every month, just to compare notes on what we are working on and thinking about. We could give practice talks. 3. Find an institutional host, for a series of informal colloquiums on Azimuth related topics. What we would be asking for a room for, say, 90 minutes, every quarter, and announcements of the talks. I'd be happy to give talks on any topic that I've been able to blog about (I have more in the pipeline, following my TO-DO list). If a talk runs too short, we could work through problem sets on the whiteboard. The premise would not be that this is advanced research, but that this is what we are learning about the sciences that can help save our planet. But with the aim of research in mind. The intended audience is the concerned and interested general public. There could be Strategy talks as well. If people are far away, there is always tele-conferencing. I think a university campus, with its espirit de corps, is a good setting for this. Something about Columbia strikes me as Azimuthal. Anyone have any high-level contacts there? There is the question of which department would be the most well-suited for this purpose. 4. This could be a starting point for further development in the direction of a lab. Eventually it would be great to have some Azimuth research centers. But let's go back to step 1. Anyone in the NYC area up for a coffee, sometime in the next month? Regarding the rest, I'll start by keeping a notebook. Regards, Dave
• Options
8.

Another idea, for the long term: Annual conference for the Azimuth Project. I'm picturing a forum with lots of intellectual content, without academic formality. If the registration fee was low, and it was well publicized in advance, then it could attract new swaths of people.

An issue here is that it sounds like a full time job to organize a conference (never done it), and many of us are employed full-time. On the other hand, if we had a budget...

Comment Source:Another idea, for the long term: Annual conference for the Azimuth Project. I'm picturing a forum with lots of intellectual content, without academic formality. If the registration fee was low, and it was well publicized in advance, then it could attract new swaths of people. An issue here is that it sounds like a full time job to organize a conference (never done it), and many of us are employed full-time. On the other hand, if we had a budget...
• Options
9.

...would be good to hold in a populous location, so that a local public could attend, without having to travel.

Comment Source:...would be good to hold in a populous location, so that a local public could attend, without having to travel.
• Options
10.

David Tanzer wrote:

We could have a coffee, for anyone who is in the area. Here, that would at least be me and Allan.

I'm in! I live in the Boerum Hill area, and work near Madison Sq Park.. how about you? You can message me on +Allan Erskine or first -dot- last -at- gmail

Something about Columbia strikes me as Azimuthal

Could it be the Earth Institute or their climate informatics offshoot? A friend of mine knows Claire Monteleoni who does all this stuff, but she has left Columbia it seems.

Comment Source:David Tanzer wrote: > We could have a coffee, for anyone who is in the area. Here, that would at least be me and Allan. I'm in! I live in the Boerum Hill area, and work near Madison Sq Park.. how about you? You can message me on +Allan Erskine or first -dot- last -at- gmail > Something about Columbia strikes me as Azimuthal Could it be [the Earth Institute](http://www.earth.columbia.edu/) or their [climate informatics](http://www1.ccls.columbia.edu/~cmontel/ci.html) offshoot? A friend of mine knows Claire Monteleoni who does all this stuff, but she has left Columbia it seems.
• Options
11.

Regarding starting a conference: assuming that you're talking about an actual conference (even a very small one) rather than, say, a group of people meeting in a room, one of the problems you're going to hit is that most general conferences are in theory "underwritten" by some organisation, typically an academic society, in the sense of saying to anyone who wants paying for services/resources "the bill will be paid, even if revenue from attendees is too small". (Of course the underwriter both appoints people it believes will organise stuff well and tracks their performance, so the risk of the underwriting guarantee being called upon are minuscule, but it's there). So if you're thinking about a conference it'd probably be good to try and get at least the first one attached to some larger body.

But there's also the possibility of trying to Azimuth-ify the conference idea itself. I know John has thoughts about virtual and/or telepresence gatherings. I think this is a very good idea, but there's a lot of subtle interaction stuff that goes on at meetings (eg, I can "queue" to someone and my physical presence means I'll probably be accepted into a group conversation, whereas in a virtual world I how do I even visualise what conversations are going on). It's absolutely both worth doing and should be done, but I suspect there's a lot of trial an error. (I've recently ended up in a daily teleconference and still can't "internalise" that when someone on the other end is looking "at" me it means he's looking at a screen where a tiny eye movement means he's looking at the window for one of the other participants.)

Comment Source:Regarding starting a conference: assuming that you're talking about an actual conference (even a very small one) rather than, say, a group of people meeting in a room, one of the problems you're going to hit is that most general conferences are in theory "underwritten" by some organisation, typically an academic society, in the sense of saying to anyone who wants paying for services/resources "the bill will be paid, even if revenue from attendees is too small". (Of course the underwriter both appoints people it believes will organise stuff well and tracks their performance, so the risk of the underwriting guarantee being called upon are minuscule, but it's there). So if you're thinking about a conference it'd probably be good to try and get at least the first one attached to some larger body. But there's also the possibility of trying to Azimuth-ify the conference idea itself. I know John has thoughts about virtual and/or telepresence gatherings. I think this is a very good idea, _but_ there's a lot of subtle interaction stuff that goes on at meetings (eg, I can "queue" to someone and my physical presence means I'll probably be accepted into a group conversation, whereas in a virtual world I how do I even visualise what conversations are going on). It's absolutely both worth doing and should be done, but I suspect there's a lot of trial an error. (I've recently ended up in a daily teleconference and still can't "internalise" that when someone on the other end is looking "at" me it means he's looking at a screen where a tiny eye movement means he's looking at the window for one of the other participants.)
• Options
12.

Allan Erskine wrote:

I'm in! I live in the Boerum Hill area, and work near Madison Sq Park.. how about you? You can message me on +Allan Erskine or first -dot- last -at- gmail

Great. I work mid-town East, and live in Park Slope. I'll contact you by email.

So it seems we are the two locals here. Let's brainstorm about how to do some local recruiting.

Could it be the Earth Institute or their climate informatics offshoot?

Great reference, thanks!

By blending scientific research, education and practical solutions, The Earth Institute, Columbia University, is working to help guide the world onto a path toward sustainability.    The Institute, under the direction of Professor Jeffrey D. Sachs, comprises more than 30 research centers and some 850 scientists, postdoctoral fellows, staff and students. Working across many disciplines, we study and create solutions for problems in public health, poverty, energy, ecosystems, climate, natural hazards and urbanization.


This could be a good organization to be affiliated with. Maybe we can find a way to "mill around" there (physically or informatically), to get a better understanding of who is doing what, who might be interested in Azimuth, and what they might have to offer us.

Apparently (?), if we just got two people interested in Azimuth participation, we would have doubled the NYC area membership. (Or if I've miscounted, it's never too late for any other locals to say hello :)

Comment Source:Allan Erskine wrote: > I'm in! I live in the Boerum Hill area, and work near Madison Sq Park.. how about you? You can message me on +Allan Erskine or first -dot- last -at- gmail Great. I work mid-town East, and live in Park Slope. I'll contact you by email. So it seems we are the two locals here. Let's brainstorm about how to do some local recruiting. > Could it be [the Earth Institute](http://www.earth.columbia.edu/) or their [climate informatics](http://www1.ccls.columbia.edu/~cmontel/ci.html) offshoot? Great reference, thanks! By blending scientific research, education and practical solutions, The Earth Institute, Columbia University, is working to help guide the world onto a path toward sustainability. The Institute, under the direction of Professor Jeffrey D. Sachs, comprises more than 30 research centers and some 850 scientists, postdoctoral fellows, staff and students. Working across many disciplines, we study and create solutions for problems in public health, poverty, energy, ecosystems, climate, natural hazards and urbanization. This could be a good organization to be affiliated with. Maybe we can find a way to "mill around" there (physically or informatically), to get a better understanding of who is doing what, who might be interested in Azimuth, and what they might have to offer us. Apparently (?), if we just got two people interested in Azimuth participation, we would have doubled the NYC area membership. (Or if I've miscounted, it's never too late for any other locals to say hello :)
• Options
13.

To David Tweed:

I think the physical and the virtual conferences each have a role to play, and neither can replace the other. I do have the physical conference in mind. It could be a great way to engaged the public, especially in a populous area.

For now, I can only take it on at the brainstorming level.

Anyone have some thoughts about what could be a cool and productive format for such a conference?

Papers, presentations and tutorials -- absolutely. But I sense that there is more that can be done, something involving more active participation from the attendees. I'm associating to the "coding sprints" that Google organized for their "Summer of Code." There are useful things to be achieved, and people generally do want to help, if they can find a way that doesn't require large sacrifice. We could have different booths, set up with computers for people to work on projects right then and there. We could have coding sprints to work on some piece of a climate model. This would be after the tutorials that bring people up to speed on at least some aspects of the model. I could run a "sprint" where people add some items to the catalog of math problems that I just started on the Wiki. If people get satisfaction out of doing such things, then they would naturally be inclined to continue as members, after the conference is over.

Perhaps it could be informatically organized so that it can run as a virtual conference. Then for those who can show up in person, it will be the most advantageous and fun. And those who are too far away to show up, can still participate from the bleachers of the virtual world.

Comment Source:To David Tweed: You make a good point about obtaining sponsorship for a conference. I think the physical and the virtual conferences each have a role to play, and neither can replace the other. I do have the physical conference in mind. It could be a great way to engaged the public, especially in a populous area. For now, I can only take it on at the brainstorming level. Anyone have some thoughts about what could be a cool and productive format for such a conference? Papers, presentations and tutorials -- absolutely. But I sense that there is more that can be done, something involving more active participation from the attendees. I'm associating to the "coding sprints" that Google organized for their "Summer of Code." There are useful things to be achieved, and people generally do want to help, if they can find a way that doesn't require large sacrifice. We could have different booths, set up with computers for people to work on projects right then and there. We could have coding sprints to work on some piece of a climate model. This would be after the tutorials that bring people up to speed on at least some aspects of the model. I could run a "sprint" where people add some items to the catalog of math problems that I just started on the Wiki. If people get satisfaction out of doing such things, then they would naturally be inclined to continue as members, after the conference is over. Perhaps it could be informatically organized so that it _can_ run as a virtual conference. Then for those who _can_ show up in person, it will be the most advantageous and fun. And those who are too far away to show up, can still participate from the bleachers of the virtual world.
• Options
14.
edited October 2012

We could certainly apply for grants to fly around in jets, spew tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and meet each other at conferences as people often do. But I think local meetings and virtual 'hangouts' are more in tune with what we're trying to accomplish: figure out a future where human life is fun yet doesn't damage the planet's ecosystems.

I've been trying to fly around less and give more talks virtually - it's hard to do well; I was not very happy with my talk at Google in the form of a robot (on YouTube here), nor with the talk I just videotaped that will be broadcast in South Africa on the 30th. I guess it takes practice, and I've had a lot more practice giving talks the old-fashioned way.

But it should be easy for David Tanzer and Allan Erskine to meet, and hook up with Cameron Smith, who is also in New York, and maybe get to know some folks at Columbia by going to talks at the Earth Institute.

And, it would be easy for us to have a hangout' on Google+, and see each other and talk about stuff. That would be great!

Comment Source:We could certainly apply for grants to fly around in jets, spew tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and meet each other at conferences as people often do. But I think local meetings and virtual 'hangouts' are more in tune with what we're trying to accomplish: figure out a future where human life is fun yet doesn't damage the planet's ecosystems. I've been trying to fly around less and give more talks virtually - it's hard to do well; I was not very happy with my talk at Google in the form of a robot ([on YouTube here](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kewoOzys2AU)), nor with the talk I just videotaped that will be broadcast in South Africa on the 30th. I guess it takes practice, and I've had a lot more practice giving talks the old-fashioned way. But it should be easy for [[David Tanzer]] and [[Allan Erskine]] to meet, and hook up with [[Cameron Smith]], who is also in New York, and maybe get to know some folks at Columbia by going to talks at the Earth Institute. And, it would be easy for us to have a [hangout'](http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/is-googles-hangouts-its-killer-app/) on Google+, and see each other and talk about stuff. That would be great!
• Options
15.

FWIW, I'm currently based in the Cambridge, UK area if there's any other Azimuth-ians (?) around.

Comment Source:FWIW, I'm currently based in the Cambridge, UK area if there's any other Azimuth-ians (?) around.
• Options
16.

Cameron, can you send some instructions for assembling your email address? Or send a note to me through gmail, I go by the name of dave dot tanzer. We could have an inaugural coffee, you, me and Allan. Lots to talk about. Thanks + Cheers

Comment Source:Cameron, can you send some instructions for assembling your email address? Or send a note to me through gmail, I go by the name of dave dot tanzer. We could have an inaugural coffee, you, me and Allan. Lots to talk about. Thanks + Cheers
• Options
17.

Comment Source:I've emailed Cameron about this because he may not be reading the forum much right now - grad school maketh a man busy.
Comment Source:Sorry for neglecting the forum! I e-mailed David Tanzer and Allan Erskine based on their respective instructions for assembling their e-mail addresses. Hopefully we can meet up soon.