I'm deeply ashamed of the rest of the story, but there was something really instructive happening here, because there are two ways of looking at a problem; the inside view and the outside view. The inside view is looking at your problem and trying to estimate what will happen in your problem. The outside view involves making that an instance of something else—of a class. When you then look at the statistics of the class, it is a very different way of thinking about problems. And what's interesting is that it is a very unnatural way to think about problems, because you have to forget things that you know—and you know everything about what you're trying to do, your plan and so on—and to look at yourself as a point in the distribution is a very un-natural exercise; people actually hate doing this and resist it.

A SHORT COURSE IN THINKING ABOUT THINKING [9.25.07]
A "Master Class" By Danny Kahneman

AN EDGE SPECIAL PROJECT

Recently, I spent a several months working closely with Danny Kahneman, the Princeton University psychologist who is the co-creator of behavioral economics (with his late collaborator Amos Tversky), for which he won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002.

My discussions with him inspired a 2-day "Master Class" given by Kahneman for a group of twenty leading American business/Internet/culture innovators—a microcosm of the recently dominant sector of American business—in Napa, California in July. They came to hear him lecture on his ideas and research in diverse fields such as human judgment, decision making and behavioral economics and well-being.

While Kahneman has a wide following among people who study risk, decision-making, and other aspects of human judgment, he is not exactly a household name. Yet among many of the top thinkers in psychology, he ranks at the top of the field.

Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert (Stumbling on Happiness) writes: "Danny Kahneman is simply the most distinguished living psychologist in the world, bar none. Trying to say something smart about Danny's contributions to science is like trying to say something smart about water: It is everywhere, in everything, and a world without it would be a world unimaginably different than this one." And according to Harvard's Steven Pinker (The Stuff of Thought): "It's not an exaggeration to say that Kahneman is one of the most influential psychologists in history and certainly the most important psychologist alive today. He has made seminal contributions over a wide range of fields including social psychology, cognitive science, reasoning and thinking, and behavioral economics, a field he and his partner Amos Tversky invented."

Over a period of two days, Kahneman presided over six sessions lasting about eight hours. The entire event was videotaped as an archive. Edge is pleased to present a sampling from the event consisting of streaming video of the first 10-15 minutes of each session along with the related verbatim transcripts.

— JB

...

EINSTEIN: AN EDGE SYMPOSIUM [9.17.07]
Brian Greene, Walter Isaacson, Paul Steinhardt

Walter Isaacson, Brian Greene, Paul Steinhardt

BRIAN GREENE: Naturally, scientists quite generally and string theorists in particular  often describe their work without giving all of the associated qualifications all of the time. I, for example,have spoken of string theory as a possible final theory, as the possible theory that would unite all forces and all matter in one consistent framework—and I generally try to say—but perhaps not always—that this is not yet a proven theory; this is our hope for what it will achieve. We aren’t certain  that this is where it is going to lead. We just need to explore and see where we land.

PAUL STEINHARDT: What angers people, I think, is the notion that the ultimate theory of physics might allow a googol possibilities. That is, even though everywhere we look in the universe has the same laws as far as we can see and seems remarkably smooth and uniform—more uniform than we needed for human existence—somehow we are supposed to believe that the greater universe that we can't ever see is completely different. I think many people wonder whether a theory like that is science, or metaphysics?

WALTER ISAACSON: That's exactly it: we were talking about why it is that it arouses such passion and then started directly debating string theory. I'd love to take it right back to Einstein—twice you said  something that I find very interesting, which is, we have to find a way to make his two grand pillars of 20th century physics compatible, general relativity and quantum theory. Of course Einstein totally would believe that, because he loved unification, he loved unity. Secondly he and Newton agreed on one big thing, which is that nature loves simplicity. But I've always wondered about the more metaphysical philosophical question: how do we know that God likes simplicity? How do we know he wants these things to be compatible? How do we know that quantum theory and relativity have to be reconcilable?

...

BOOTSTRAPPING OUR WAY TO AN AGELESS FUTURE
By Aubrey de Grey

So there you have it. We will almost certainly take centuries to reach the level of control over aging that we have over the aging of vintage cars—totally comprehensive, indefinite maintenance of full function—but because longevity escape velocity is not very fast, we will probably achieve something functionally equivalent within only a few decades from now, at the point where we have therapies giving middle-aged people 30 extra years of youthful life.

I think we can call that the fountain of youth, don't you?

...

MORAL PSYCHOLOGY AND THE MISUNDERSTANDING OF RELIGION
By Jonathan Haidt

It might seem obvious to you that contractual societies are good, modern, creative and free, whereas beehive societies reek of feudalism, fascism, and patriarchy. And, as a secular liberal I agree that contractual societies such as those of Western Europe offer the best hope for living peacefully together in our increasingly diverse modern nations (although it remains to be seen if Europe can solve its current diversity problems).

I just want to make one point, however, that should give contractualists pause: surveys have long shown that religious believers in the United States are happier, healthier, longer-lived, and more generous to charity and to each other than are secular people.

THE REALITY CLUB: David Sloan Wilson, Michael Shermer, Sam Harris

...

THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF A DIPLOID HUMAN GENOME FROM ONE PERSON

[From the press release, J. Craig Venter Institute:] "In 2001 two versions of the human genome were published enabling researchers a first look at humans at our most basic level. While these achievements marked a new era in science, it was clear that more analysis and more sequenced genomes were needed for a more complete understanding of human biology. And because these first published genomes were mosaics of many people’s genomes, rather than genomes of individuals, it was likely that much of the key information about each person—what particular traits or propensity for disease were coded for in their genes and proteins, was missing. In short the era of true individualized genome medicine was not yet realized, until now.

"Today, researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute, along with collaborators from Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, the University of California, San Diego, and the Universidad de Barcelona in Spain have published the first diploid genome of an individual—Dr. Venter, in PLoS Biology. This analysis and assembly of the 20 billion base pairs of Dr. Venter’s DNA is the first look at both sets of his chromosomes (one inherited from each of his parents) and has shown a greater degree and more kinds of genetic variation with human to human variation five to seven times greater than in previous genome analysis.

"This new individual genome has tantalizing vistas—more than 4.1 million genetic variants covering 12.3 million base pairs of DNA. More than 3.2 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), 1.2 million never before seen variants and nearly a million non-SNP variants. But it’s still only the beginning. Many more individual human genomes need to be sequenced, the technology to do so needs to improve, and additional analysis of this first reference human genome will continue. Researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute are forging ahead on all these fronts in their quest for new and better understanding of human genomics." ...

The Diploid Genome Sequence of an Individual Human. Levy S, Sutton G, Ng PC, Feuk L, Halpern AL, et al.

THE NEW YORK TIMES
September 4, 2007

In the Genome Race, the Sequel Is Personal
By Nicholas Wade

[picture caption:] A team led by J. Craig Venter, above, has finished the first mapping of a full, or diploid, genome, made up of DNA inherited from both parents. The genome is Dr. Venter’s own.

The race to decode the human genome may not be entirely over: the loser has come up with a new approach that may let him prevail in the end.

In 2003, a government-financed consortium of academic centers announced it had completed the human genome, fending off a determined challenge from the biologist J. Craig Venter. The consortium’s genome comprised just half the DNA contained in a normal cell, and the DNA used in the project came from a group of people from different racial and ethnic backgrounds.

But the loser in the race, Dr. Venter, could still have the last word. In a paper published today, his research team is announcing that it has decoded a new version of the human genome that some experts believe may be better than the consortium’s.

Called a full, or diploid genome, it consists of the DNA in both sets of chromosomes, one from each parent, and it is the normal genome possessed by almost all the body’s cells. And the genome the team has decoded belongs to just one person: Dr. Venter.

The new genome, Dr. Venter’s team reports, makes clear that the variation in the genetic programming carried by an individual is much greater than expected. In at least 44 percent of Dr. Venter’s genes, the copies inherited from his mother differ from those inherited from his father, according to the analysis published in Tuesday’s issue of PLoS Biology.

Huntington F. Willard, a geneticist at Duke University who has had early access to Dr. Venter’s genome sequence, said that the quality of the new genome was “exceptionally high” and that “until the next genome comes along this is the gold standard right now.” ...

CNN
September 4, 2007

Genetic variation greater than expected

From the first time it was reveled that my DNA constituted the majority portion of the human genome published by my team at Celera Genomics in 2001, I have frequently been asked what it is like to gaze at my own genetic code. Now, with today's publication of my diploid genome in the public access journal PLOS Biology as the first individual genome, it seems to have only increased people's fascination with what it's like to have your genome in hand. The difference between then and now is that many of the questions today center on what you can learn from reading your genetic code and how soon they can get their genomes sequenced. ....

ScienceNOW Daily News
4 September 2007

How to Build a Craig Venter
By Jon Cohen

...For the first time, researchers have published the DNA sequence from both sets of chromosomes in a single person. That person is none other than pioneering genome researcher J. Craig Venter. The new sequence suggests that there is substantially more variation between humans than previously recognized and pushes personalized medicine a step closer. ...

THE GUARDIAN
September 4, 2007

DNA pioneer publishes own genome
Ian Sample, science correspondent

...The nearly 3bn pairs of letters that spell out Craig Venter's genetic code were sequenced for the research paper, which was published last night in the free-to-access journal PLoS Biology.

It is the first time a complete genome, covering chromosomes inherited from each parent, has been published for an individual Dr Venter's genome, and that of James Watson, the co-discoverer of DNA's double-helix structure, have previously been posted on scientific web sites.

Analysis of the genome allowed the team based at the J Craig Venter Institute in Maryland to compare how chromosomes from one parent differed from those inherited from the other, revealing stark differences between the two.

Based on the study, the team concluded that genetic variation between humans is more than seven times greater than previously thought. ...

A Life Decoded
By J. Craig Venter

THE CHANGING ARCTIC: A RESPONSE TO FREEMAN DYSON'S "HERETICAL THOUGHTS"
By Alun Anderson [8.14.07]

Alun Anderson, Edge's Arctic correspondent, on location
[Photo Credit: John McConnico — click to enlarge image]

Knowing that Arctic climate models are imperfect, it would be reassuring for me, if not for the scientists, to be able to write that scientists keep making grim predictions that just that don't come true. If that were so, we could follow Dyson's line that the models aren't so good and "the fuss is exaggerated". Scarily, the truth is the other way around. The ice is melting faster than the grimmest of the scientist's predictions, and the predictions keep getting grimmer. Now we are talking about an Arctic free of ice in summer by 2040. That's a lot of melting given that, in the long, dark winter the ice covers an area greater than that of the entire United States.

...

HERETICAL THOUGHTS ABOUT SCIENCE AND SOCIETY [8.8.07]
By Freeman Dyson

My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak. But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in. The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds. That is why the climate model experts end up believing their own models.

...

Every year Edge publishes a Summer Postcards edition. For the 2007 edition, here are photos (mine and those of other Edge contributors) from SciFoo Camp—the unclassifiable O'Reilly/Nature/Google meeting of the minds now in its second year. — George Dyson

SCIFOO 2007 [8.8.07]
A Photo Essay by George Dyson

Every hour there was at least one session I wished I could have attended, but the one I will single out here is "Give us your Data! Google's effort to archive and distribute the world's scientific datasets" by Noel Gorelick (formerly of NASA and now at Google). For a conference on the future of biology, technology, and science, meeting at Google's global headquarters, this was a rare session that focused explicitly on how Google is changing the landscape. Rather, Google now is the landscape, and the success of SciFoo offers ample demonstration of that.

Many Edge contributors and/or event participants were in attendance, including Larry Brilliant. Sergey Brin, Philip Campbell, Geoff Carr , George Church, Chris DiBona, Carl Djerassi, Eric Drexler , Esther Dyson, Freeman Dyson, Danny Hillis, Steve Jurvetson, Dean Kamen, Vinod Khosla, Jaron Lanier, Oliver Morton, PZ Myers, Tim O'Reilly, Larry Page, David Pescovitz, Stuart Pimm, Martin Rees, Michael Shermer, Clay Shirky, Charles Simonyi, Lee Smolin, Linda Stone, Yossi Vardi, Frank Wilczek, and Anne Wojcicki.

...

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
October 2, 2007

The Future of Bioenergy
By Juan Enriquez

...Over the next decade, improvements in energy production will likely come to depend far more on understanding the biology of energy than its chemistry. As we grow bugs that like to eat sulfur, it will be a lot easier and cheaper to turn heavy crude into sweet crude. As we understand the microbial communities that lead to differential pressures in wells, we can become far better at extracting oil than by finding one more drilling fluid or learning new ways to fracture wells.

We have barely begun to scratch the surface. Today's efforts to use plants to power our SUVs are primitive at best. Plants are not programmed to make gasoline, nor are bacteria. Ethanol is simply a complex and expensive byproduct. But then again yesterday's corn and wheat were not programmed to grow fast, large and golden. That change required biologists.

The same will be true of today's primitive biofuels. Last month Science magazine reported the first full transplant of DNA from one cell to another. That is the first step in being able to program cells specifically for energy production on a massive and efficient scale. It is the birth of a new and potentially very large industry, one comparable in scale to biotechnology. ...

WASHINGTON POST
October 2, 2007
ON FAITH

The Problem with Atheism
By Sam Harris

...Attaching a label to something carries real liabilities, especially if the thing you are naming isn’t really a thing at all. And atheism, I would argue, is not a thing. It is not a philosophy, just as “non-racism” is not one. Atheism is not a worldview—and yet most people imagine it to be one and attack it as such. We who do not believe in God are collaborating in this misunderstanding by consenting to be named and by even naming ourselves.

Another problem is that in accepting a label, particularly the label of “atheist,” it seems to me that we are consenting to be viewed as a cranky sub-culture. We are consenting to be viewed as a marginal interest group that meets in hotel ballrooms. I’m not saying that meetings like this aren’t important. I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t think it was important. But I am saying that as a matter of philosophy we are guilty of confusion, and as a matter of strategy, we have walked into a trap. It is a trap that has been, in many cases, deliberately set for us. And we have jumped into it with both feet.

While it is an honor to find myself continually assailed with Dan [Dennett], Richard [Dawkins], and Christopher [Hitchens] as though we were a single person with four heads, this whole notion of the “new atheists” or “militant atheists” has been used to keep our criticism of religion at arm’s length, and has allowed people to dismiss our arguments without meeting the burden of actually answering them. And while our books have gotten a fair amount of notice, I think this whole conversation about the conflict between faith and reason, and religion and science, has been, and will continue to be, successfully marginalized under the banner of atheism. ...

10 ZEN MONKEYS TV
September 21, 2007

Rod Brooks Builds Robots

NEW SCIENTIST
September 14, 2007

COVER STORY

Mathematical cosmos: Reality by numbers
By Max Tegmark

ALJAZEERA NET
September 12, 2007

The Book of Life
Riz Kahn

That achievement was reached last week, when Venter's institute, the J Craig Venter Institute, announced that it had completed its work to decode Venter's genome.

Watch the episode here...

ARTS & LETTERS DAILY
September 12, 2007

Essays and Opinion

Suppose a family cooks and eats its dog, after the pet is killed by a car. What’s wrong with that? Our moral intuitions are a morass of reason and emotion... more»

THE NEW YORK TIMES
September 10, 2007
SCIENCE TIMES

Evidence of Genetic Response to Diet
By Nicholas Wade

...Richard Wrangham, a primatologist at Harvard and an advocate of the tuber-eating thesis, said the amylase finding was a convincing insight into the different digestive physiology of people and chimps, but that the date of 200,000 years ago, derived from limited genetic information, was not old enough to give direct support to his ideas. ...

NEW SCIENTIST
September 6, 2007

Low-cost personal DNA readings are on the way
Peter Aldhous

TIME

Words Don't Mean What They Mean
Steven Pinker

TIMES LITERARY SUPLLEMENT
September 5, 2007

Bible belter
Richard Dawkins

THREE QUARKS DAILY
September 3, 2007

Monday Musing: Pinker's Thinkers

NEW SCIENTIST
September 1, 2007

What good is God?
Helen Phillips

Born to be moral

XCONOMY | Kendall Square
August 30, 2007

Rubbing Elbows and Dodging Bees With Synthetic Biology Pioneer George Church
Gregory T. Huang

EL NORTE — MEXICO
August 25, 2007

Tercera cultura y política
Alfonso Elizondo

[Google Translation]

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
September 2007

SKEPTIC

Rational Atheism
An open letter to Messrs. Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens
By Michael Shermer

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
September 2007

ANTIGRAVITY

What's the Big Idea?
When the lightbulb above your head is truly incendiary
By Steve Mirsky

DISCOVER MAGAZINE
August, 2007

MIND & BRAIN

Jaron's World: Peace through God
By Jaron Lanier