#4thBranch

[jacktrammell]

Unelegant Universe

06/12/2024

Transportation Accessibility Analysis for Unelegant Universe

A Google search leading to an “I Love New York” type web site revealed that visiting restaurants in Hell’s Kitchen was one of the site’s most recommended attractions in New York City for people who are wheelchair users.  As part of my study of the role of transportation and innovative technology in facilitating access for people with disabilities, I conducted a wheelchair experiment to test that out.  I started at the Hampton Inn on 337 West 39th Street in the Garment District.  Level one transportation is the motorized chair, which had little problem leaving the hotel through the automatic door openers, although the second/outer door was a little quick on the close.

Once on the sidewalk, there were level two transportation options.  In New York City that could be cab, bus, personal auto, subway, private van service, etc.  For people not using wheelchairs there are biking, scooter, and rickshaw options that obviously weren’t a good choice; Uber and other private rides are not often accessible.  A personal auto is also not recommended in Manhattan for nearly anyone due to congestion and parking costs.  The subway does not serve Hell’s Kitchen from that direction (and many subway stations remain inaccessible to wheelchair users, so that would need scouted out in advance even if it were an option).  The cost for a private van was prohibitive compared to bus or cab fare, so ultimately the realistic choices were walking (i.e., moving by chair), cab, or bus.

The New York Times reported that the wait time for an accessible cab had been reduced from 34 minutes to 13 minutes, but my calls to cab services and talks to locals suggested that it still would be at least a 30-minute wait, and probably longer.  That left bus and just walking (chairing).  A quick look at the bus routes showed that there would be two quick changes of routes, and a couple of blocks jaunt to a bus stop.  It seemed since it was a sunny day that maybe a relaxing walk (chair ride) would just be the best option.  (Sidenote: MTA claims that 100% of their buses are accessible; of the 13 I saw on our journey all had accessibility equipment; there was no way to check that all were working…)  Since the restaurant area of Hell’s Kitchen was in theory less than ten blocks away, I decided to just go on my own.

I turned to the right and immediately encountered a construction enclosure over the sidewalk, but unlike others I would soon pass through, this one was wide enough that someone using a chair could pass by someone walking by in the opposite direction.  I reached the corner of 39th and Ninth Avenue and turned right.  So far, so good.  People, for some unnatural reason, seemed to want to steer clear of me, although personally I am starting to notice bad, uneven stretches of sidewalk that ultimately are a wear and tear on me, and on the chair, too.  I continued up Ninth past the bus garage and ultimately up to 42nd Street.  I couldn’t help but notice that a lot of the charming stores or small cafes had an eight inch or so threshold to get into the door.

I crossed over Ninth, trying to ignore a couple of delivery bikes clearly violating traffic patterns, and headed toward 10th Avenue on 42nd Street.  For the first time, I encountered sidewalk construction coverings that only had room for my chair and not so much for another person to pass.  This caused some awkwardness for others but not so much for me as I know I am entitled to the right of way.  Turning right onto Tenth Avenue and entering Hell’s Kitchen proper, then heading NE I encounter my first missing curb cut.  Why here? I wondered.  But it wasn’t long before a city repair crew blocked another intersection which did have a curb cut; but one not available to me!

About 46th Street (I don’t want to be too specific and give away anyone’s real business) we reached the restaurant we had scoped out online in advance, and it turned out that they, too, had a significant threshold.  The woman at the entrance offered first to have us sit outside in a sidewalk seating area (which I definitely didn’t want to do), and then seemed to toy with the idea of her brother helping me and the chair in, but I could tell she knew she shouldn’t do that and I ultimately acquiesced to sitting outside.

The space was cramped.  The woman helpfully scooted one table to the side, but from my perspective that was ad hoc and kept someone else from sitting outside who might have wanted to.  None-the-less, the food was as good as advertised and it was a delightful meal.  The people there were genuinely kind, attentive, and fun to talk to.

Leaving the restaurant, we decided to cut back over on 46th Street to head back to the hotel, making essentially a big square pattern.  Within the first two blocks, a sidewalk was fully closed for a stretch and I had to backtrack and recross to the other side; there were also more stretches of buckled and rough sidewalk; there were more narrow construction sidewalk coverings; and there were people who sometimes put on the expression that I was the problem slowing them down.

By the time we returned to the hotel, I was thoroughly exhausted, physically and mentally.  To say that restaurants in Hell’s Kitchen are an ideal attraction for people with disabilities including wheelchair users seems a bit problematic…

###

Postscript.  I don’t normally use a wheelchair, but I conducted this experience on foot trying to imagine what it would actually be like.  Since transportation has been a major battleground over disability rights, and an incredible emerging technology over the last two-hundred years, transportation is one of the “innovation lens” through which I am trying gauge the impact of Artificial Intelligence on people with disabilities.  The moral of this short, mostly “true” story is: “Will the reality match the promise?” and “When has a new technology ever seriously changed people’s views about disability?”

My coming book on this is entitled: The Unelegant Universe, and I can be reached at j.k.trammell@msmary.edu if you have thoughts to share or would agree to be interviewed for the project.

[themoonforall]

[ninja-o-s]

We must see ourselves as we could become. It’s a work in progress. Do you see our possible fates? #thefuture is #ourchoice. With the #4thbranch #voteandveto we can create #abetterworld. #ourdynamicimagination enables us to explore together.

[rawwattage-blog]

Our sediments exactly #truth @Regrann from @techimmortal - Some people only see what they want to see. They don't see the bigger picture. They are either agents of discord pushing to cause hatred and division instead of a meaningful conversation or they act out of sheer ignorance. We condemn all forms of terrorism. Not just the stereotypical scare tactics we see in the media but also the State sponsored terrorism. I repeat again and again whether it's people poisoning water for profit, engaging in "regime change", or blowing up innocent people. These are all connected. We are again and again asked to give up our freedoms for the illusion of security. People say that if you have nothing to hide you won't mind the invasion of privacy. The logic of fake blocked accounts run by Feds and other agents of disinformation. #ImmortalTechnique #4thBranch #Media #Terrorism #Patriotism People died for the right to speak out, the right to protest, the right to fight against a corrupt system. Miss me with me petty nonsense. The walls are closing around us and people are arguing about what color people's shirts are or if they believe in this God or that idea. You're gonna wake up with everything you believe in shattered someday. Just don't say I didn't warn you. Be safe out there! - #regrann #stayalert #observe be #vigilant #preparefortheworst

[nociondirecta]

Fuck that #4thBranch..! I'm working so that my community never has to rely on the government..! Trust me it's a matter of time... we are going to break free from this bitch manne..!

[woftd]

#TBT I did a show with @techimmortal which was awesome, but what was really amazing is I got to tell him how much his song #4thBranch changed the direction of my writing completely and how I felt it was the very definition of a song about the system. So much so that I didn't need to even write about the government anymore. Who ever thought I'd go from listening to that in my room to sharing a bill and stage with him! He also put me on to some game when it comes to being an #independent artist, then during his set he said he added the track to his show because of our conversation. That's a real dude right there. #ImmortalTechnique @ImmortalTechnique shouts to @djgijoe @cf201 @akir170 and the @cvillejefferson This is #hiphop @viperrecords @spmusik #RichmondIsForHaters #WOFTD #TNJC WE #RVA

[herbicidalmotives]

#truth #immortaltechnique #realhiphop #4thbranch

[jacktrammell]

VA10 Senate

Exciting news--running in the VA10 Senate special election. Please consider supporting!

[jdusher]

@techimmortal #4thBranch one of my favorite #immortaltechnique songs #classic #hiphop #warandpeacetour #hiphophead #chicago (at Metro)

[ninja-o-s]

I must remind the world of our history and show them all that we could become. #hopeatlast #ourdynamicimagination #science #history#faith #theunitedofamerica #4thbranch #2016firstyearofpeace

[moveunits]

#1984 #metropolis #4thbranch #MK

[4thbranch-blog]

[jacktrammell]

Oh Well

Friends: Although it’s past, thanks again for your support in my race in the VA07. I am quite despondent. Family members, colleagues, and even us are thinking of moving out of country. To Trump Voters: Best wishes for USA. To you: thank you for loving the American experiment. #4thBranch

[jacktrammell]

The Unelegant Universe

Introduction

I may have invented a brand new word for this book: unelegant.  Some people claim that inelegant and unelegant are both words.  The latter means something gauche; out of style; not attractive; or something disapproved.  On the other hand, where it is accepted as a word, unelegant means the state of not being elegant and is agnostic, neither beautiful or ugly, not good or bad; it simply is not elegant.

We live in a complicated and quite elegant universe (with all due thanks to the great scientist Brian Greene, whose book I have read several times).  But I am arguing instead that A.I. is unelegant.  It simply is.  We, on other hand, cannot afford to be agnostic about A.I.

In 2024 Artificial Intelligence demands a brand-new synonym for its own name because the current two-word term and famous acronym in English has become completely stereotyped and meaningless in a remarkably short time.  There is no such thing as Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) anymore.  That is already an outdated concept.  There now are instead various groups of humans co-existing with other groups, networks, and collections of machines and technologies that people originally created, but which are now perpetuating themselves and quickly being adopted as surrogate “smart” family and community members we allow without question into our most intimate human spaces.

Georg Simmel’s classic social theory of the Triad (3 humans creating complexity by interacting in a group) has now become replaced by the AI-ad.  It is the reality of our times.  Rather than resisting an irresistible force, we instead must learn new ways to use social science to understand who we are in this series of relationships, and what our place in the world/universe with A.I. is.

This book is not about A.I. in any technical sense.  A.I. has already grown beyond the control and understanding of any one human being no matter what their individual genius.  Instead, this book is about what A.I. does to or has done to impact the human animal; how it directly and indirectly impacts the sapient brain and evolving neurology; what A.I. does to classic social science theory; how A.I. has changed long accepted notions of normality ranging from the “security” of the nation-state to the “how” of the ways we teach our children.  In fact, Generation Z is wired for A.I. (more of this later in the book).

On the interpersonal level, A.I. has introduced existential questions about relationships, ranging from sex robots to marriage between humans and an A.I.  On the bigger level, it is engaged in creating a new politics never seen before in human governance.  The list could go on and on.

But on the practical level, what does this all mean?

In realistic terms, it means a complete reimagining of every social structure we have taken for granted for the last two hundred years, from the family and the role of religion in daily life, to how we understand work and capitalism.  In fact, capitalism may be one of the early fatalities of the new paradigm (and even though it pains me as a sociologist to say it, that may not be a good thing).  In the world of A.I., Max Weber’s original conceptualization of rationality is turned upside down on its head—the rational technology becomes the irrational human partner, and vice versa.

I will illustrate in Chapter 1 the “Raccoon Theory,” which shows some of the basic neurology impacted by new technologies, and most importantly by A.I.  In Chapter 2, we will walk through some basic bomb shells that A.I. lobs into classic social theory about human behavior.  Chapter 3 will explore relationships, and how A.I. is impacting courtship, teamwork, and friendship.  Chapter 4 will build on Chapter 3 and specifically examine the workplace and how A.I. has transformed what it means to be an employee, a boss, an executive, and a CEO.  Later in the text, there will be an actual primer for employers and employees about how to live in this new work world (see Appendix 1).  Chapter 5 is about education, and what can be done to preserve the good but embrace the inevitable.  Chapter 6 will begin to explore the “Oppenheimer” aspects of A.I. with questions about what kind of new ethics and moral codes should guide the regulation and promotion of even newer A.I. or the soon anticipated “super intelligence” (still “a few months away” at the writing of this book…)  Chapter 7 will look at the possible fate of the nation state, the related politics and what A.I. means in terms of globalization.  Chapter 8 will deal with disability, sickness and injury, and the special things that can happen mostly only to humans.  Chapter 9 will conclude with a risky analysis of what might be next.

If you care about this type of thing, please not that A.I. did not author any portion of this book; it did, however, greatly facilitate its creation every day in many different ways, and it aided me personally, as well.

Cheers to the new world.

Jack Trammell, Ph.D.

Mount Saint Mary’s University (MD)

June 2024

[jacktrammell]

Why Being "Us" Matters

Why Being “Us” Matters

Jack Trammell, Ph.D.

It’s hard to look at my undergraduate students at the end of this fall semester and not have a great deal of trepidation and outright anxiety about the world they are inheriting. In the current world, I have tenure and they can take another class with me in the spring; I can choose the books they are assigned; I can discuss A.I. in the abstract and they aren’t frightened by the historical analogs; we can discuss globalization and diversity without fear of reprisal; we can engage in critical arguments about social justice and the welfare state; we can embrace the value of education for gainful employment and as an end in and of itself; we can discuss and debate the privileges of being American and/or studying in the United States.

But that is all possibly coming to an abrupt end.  What exactly, they want to know, does it mean to be “us” these days?? And why should we protect it?

Normally, I would coach my undergraduate students on the merits of “NOT just being ‘us’” but instead being global citizens with an obligation to the greater human good that transcends identity politics (ex. being “American,” or being young or old, etc.)  But with grinding war in Eastern Europe by proxy, renewed fighting in the Middle East, threats in the Asian Pacific region, protests all over the globe, and even very real domestic threats in the U.S.A. (according to F.B.I. Director Wray and others), it’s very difficult to resist the allure of protectionism, security, and an understandable desire to fall back on being on the “right side.”  Safety and comfort are seductive companions.

But the world is not safe.  America is not safe.  And we must ask “what it means to be us.”

The recent protests on college and university campuses over the war in the Middle East illustrate the perils of defaulting to platitudes and simplicities.  There are innocent people dying on all sides.  It’s not good enough to be on the right side anymore.  The world has “grown up” and we can’t escape our connections to “others” of all types.  And still, my students keep asking me “why does being us matter?” and I feel a strong obligation to reply to them in some meaningful way, shape, or form.  I can’t tell them “I don’t have an answer!” (That’s not acceptable for a Ph.D. with tenure, or a privileged white American male…)

As a sociologist, I have to go back to the “us” (and not the classic “I” and “me,” with all due respect to George Herbet Mead).  I am looking at twenty-five people in front of me in my American university classroom that represent at least five major faith traditions; at least five different gender identifications; three with dual citizenship; seven with at least one parent born in another country; five that are first generation college students; a multiplicity of racial and ethnic backgrounds that I can’t and won’t guess at; some legacy students from wealthy alumni parents; and all of them are paying a significant amount to obtain a liberal arts bachelor’s degree at my institution.  And they are here to get the answer to “what does it mean to be us?”

I suppose if you’ve read this far, or if you’re one of my students, you are demanding an answer.  So here goes…  To be us, in my opinion, means to be true to timeless American/human values: protect and cling to our fragile democracy; be slow to judge others and quick to assist those in need; embrace the value of education; cherish libertarian freedoms (like choosing my own textbooks for classes); try to make your voice be heard.  And most of all, remember that the “us” we strive so hard to find automatically creates the “them” and perpetuates many of the things we all agree are destructive and unprofitable.

But the world is not likely to stop for pleasant discussions like this.  In a democracy, you must vote to sustain the “us” and make your voice heard.  That is how the “why being us” question really matters.

###

Jack Trammell is a professor, author, entrepreneur, and former (future) candidate for Congress in the Virginia 5th Congressional District.  He can be reached at jacktrammell@yahoo.com

[jacktrammell]

AI

Neomodernity and AI

By Jack Trammell, Ph.D.

Something happened this March that shook higher education to its core and changed everything.  A.I. (artificial intelligence) came on like another Pearl Harbor; a shot heard round the world that changed everything.  Some faculty senates even debated stopping the semester early.  AI was already around before this of course, but once every ordinary human could get on Chat GPT for free and try it out for themselves, a mass hysteria swept out of higher education and into the mainstream.  References to Hal (2001: A Space Odessey) suddenly were back in social media and pop culture everywhere, 55 years after the fact.

I tried to be rational about it.  The invention of the camera did NOT (in spite of fears at the time) spell the end of painting or portraiture, or art itself.  Those disciplines remain arguably as respected as they have ever been (and have you tried to find a good courtroom sketch artist these days??)  There are probably more horses alive now in the U.S. than there were when the Model T was released.  Yes, students cheated on assignments this spring using AI, and we used software to try and catch them.  The sky didn’t fall.  Yet.

Some important scientific, theological, and sociological voices are claiming that AI is profoundly different and a singular development in human history.  Some are sounding extremely grave warnings.

For me personally and as a social scientist, AI can seem like just one in a long line of developments that began around 1850 and continues to this day.  It made things like my Roomba and my iPhone inevitable.  But I also believe that something critical changed around 1950.  From sociologists like C.W. Mills to artists like Andy Warhol, a growing reaction to the horrors of the Holocaust and the H-bomb was in the makings that turns out in hindsight to have been a significant bump in the human road to ultimate progress.  We may indeed choose to look back on AI as an inevitable progression of modernity—but if it now has a “life” of its own how can the danger not be real?

Is AI capable of orchestrating a genocide?  Is AI capable of developing a new cosmic weapons system?  Is AI capable of being an evil leader behind the screen of a “fake” human leader?  Its defenders usually say “no” although when you corner them and ask them to define what AI can and can’t do they ultimately say something to the effect that, “the sky is the limit.”  Hmm.  Just the sky??

I will be honest.  I am scared of lots of things—rampant inequality; war; nationalism; greed—it’s a long list.  But now I have to say that I think AI is at the very top.

###

Jack Trammell is former candidate for Congress; university professor and author; and small farmer.  He can be reached at jacktrammell@yahoo.com