Each year, a collection of some of the worlds greatest scientists and thinkers attempt to answer an open-ended question posed by the foundation. For example: "What is your most dangerous idea?", "What are you optimistic about", and "What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it?". The answers are collected and edited into books, but you can read through them all on the website.

This year's question is "What will change everything?". (Hint: If you were thinking "economic collapse", you'll be disappointed)

The responses are almost always thought-provoking and/or challenging. Reading through the answers, I find myself constantly learning about something new or relearning something I thought I knew due to the latest advances in our understanding. It's an ultra-concentrated intellectual experience. Highly recommended.

Happy New Year!

Adam Greenfield, ubiquitous computing pundit, wrote a blog post recently about an unusual British Airways advertisement he encountered:

This is how the ad reads: “YESTERDAY AT T5 AVERAGE TIME THROUGH SECURITY WAS 4.7 MINS. This picture was taken at 9:44am yesterday and shows Amanda Gemmill on her way to Beijing to watch her boyfriend compete in the Men’s Eight Rowing Final. 4.7 minutes was the average time the 842 customers we asked told us it took them to pass through Security yesterday, between 6am and 2pm. We had to stop at 2pm so we could make this ad.”

The purpose of this ad is to reassure travelers that Heathrow's new Terminal 5 alleviates the airport's infamously long security waits which often lead to delayed departures.

As Greenfield points out, the ad was created in what is soon to be "the old-fashioned way": humans walking around talking to humans, rushing information to the printers, and fixing it to static sheets of pulp. In the near future, it will be possible do the same thing in realtime, with sensors and dynamic media.

Consider the implications of this "transparent advertising". If BA is uses realtime data to taut better service, then to make their point they actually have to have better service.

Let that sink in for a moment.

If the data is not being manipulated and the ads aren't taken down at the first sign of trouble, this is a ballsy move. If BA holds up their end of the deal, it makes a powerful statement: "We don't need to be clever, we're just good-- and we've got the data to prove it". However, if BA slips up, that same copy becomes a public dissemination of guilt. Transparency cuts both ways.

It's an interesting angle in this age of jaded consumers: deliver on what is promised; truth, if not accountability, in advertising. I realize it's naive to expect things to work this way, but shouldn't they?

(Zingerman's would do it)

I was doing some work this afternoon and procrastinated with some Facebook maintenance which involved reloading the site several times over the span of a few minutes in order to view my profile changes.

Imagine my utter shock when this ad was served up and would not leave my newsfeed:

Of course, when I saw this, I immediately made a blog post. Apparently, I am easily distracted.

Facebook, like AdSense and many other websites, uses contextual elements (favorite TV shows in your profile, for example) to serve up targeted advertising.

The ad in question is most likely just an unfortunate coincidence, but for a moment I thought I had been observed, morally judged for my behavior, and then given a sales pitch.

(In other words, I probably had a glimpse of the future.)