Thank You for an interesting conference in Vienna.It could seam that most parts of the conclusions are about what we can do, what and how we can and use the ICT, and which resources to put into the ICT, and the resources we can get out of the ICT. But where are the protection of the innocent, the naive and the use of the human natural resources as talents?´
Originality must be innocent, actual and relevant. Originality must be authentic in its presentation, without interference of strange elements, censorship, omits, editing, use of parts of the original and possibly be free from cultural, material and ethnical reductions, so the communication in any expression can or will be able to appear as naive in its entirety and presentation, to provide diversity and the special which someone regards as unique originality in its totality, and therefore a contribution to the diversity.
There are not many talents or infant prodigies, as for instance Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. But could we not be aware of talents or infant prodigies also in the world of ICT? Let us be aware of, value, develop and bring these unique humans forward without hesitation, maybe without consideration of recourses, so these humans get challenges and maybe can participate creatively and develop a better ICT for the benefit of us all.
Now approximately a week before closing, I also have the following suggestions and comments:
- Regarding the Introduction:
"….The role of creativity has been magnified by the explosive developments in Information and Communication Technologies — ICTs. ICTs are perhaps the most powerful means to produce, preserve, and communicate the fruits of human creativity, including information, know-how, knowledge, and works of art."
Is it necessary to mention that ICTs are the most powerful means - if ICT is that? "Perhaps" maybe a much better word to use?
- Regarding ICT x CREATIVITY=QUALITY CONTENTS:
"….The challenge for creative people is to match the powers of ICT tools with their imagination and minds. Generally, technologies can do more than most creators and users require, know about, or even might want to have available to them. This capability surplus constitutes a key challenge to creators; it can dwarf them or open new horizons for expression….."
ICT tools are developed by people for people, many times for solving problems, or for other purposes. Therefore one may not say that ICT tools are difficult to match for creative people, it is up to the producers of ICT tools to match the human minds, their dreams, and their imaginations, not to get decline as, quotations: "...know about, or even might want to have available to them…". Since the interface for ICT tools and communications is so easy to produce now and in the future, there may be a problem to recognize and appreciate, and one could even risk stagnation in development and quality, when the ideas and talents or "angels" are not recognised as one of the pillars of the development of the ICT.
Therefore what are Quality contents - the content quality most people like best at this present time? Let us hope that diversity is allowed, and even obscene things are presented in the future, so mankind, as history many times has shown, do not miss the diversity of the Quality contents because we do not like what we now see, hear or experience, by using the ICT in all it's forms.
- Regarding: eLearning and eScience: Workshop on Best Practices:
"To allow for these developments to take place, the UN is needed minimum to ensure that the technical standards for the Internet as such, as well as technical standards for e-Learning solutions, are developed in an open and public process together with the respective industries. This level of future interoperability must not be controlled by single players, as it directly affects communication and access to information, which are basic human needs. Only the further elaboration of funding mechanisms will allow for sustainable e-Learning projects in the future."
Instead of, quotation: "......the UN is needed to ensure that.....", perhaps it would be a better formulation that: ".....the UN is needed minimum to ensure..."?
3.1 "Communication technologies should be adapted to make the general public understand (and then critically interact with) the scientific community, as many scientists work in military research - in the "laboratories of death", as Pope John Paul II remarked. Their agendas should be neither a secret nor sacred."
With all respect to the late Pope John Paul II, why use the remark "laboratories of death" in the Vienna Conclusion? The quotation and use of Pope John Paul II as remarks and reference, may not be relevant or universal for the Vienna Conclusion.
We ought to appreciate the variation, purpose, and the content of research all over the world,
but not to emphasize one type of research before another, all though military research, as one may claim has a bad side effect - that people get killed - maybe there are also positive effects of military research?
I hope that the reflections, suggestions and comments mentioned above are actual and relevant for the Vienna Conclution. When the final document is finished, I would appreciate to know where, and when to find it, or to receive a copy of it.
Thank You.
With best regards
Designinvest
Alex Bruun Christensen - Dreyer
