Lamont genealogy and the lost hamlets of Glengairn, Aberdeenshire

For years I have been researching the origins of my family. One of the most perplexing mysteries concerned the origins of my forebear James Lamont who emigrated from Scotland to the United States in the mid-1800s. I knew his name, his year of birth, the names of his parents and children, but little about where he came from. In the past few months, with the aid of a professional genealogist and a local historian in Scotland, I have narrowed the search to a remote area of Aberdeenshire, a historical district in Scotland. [Update: I have published additional posts relating to Aberdeeshire here: Ardoch Scotland revisited (2016) and Ardoch, Scotland in 1830: Recreated map and census (2019)]

Any American who attempts genealogical research of Scottish forebears is likely to run into a records gap when going back before 1850. The quantity and quality of census records, church records, newspapers, and other written documentation is poor -- for instance, the UK did not begin a census until 1841 and Scottish civil records (marriages, births, etc.) weren't really formalized until 1855. In the U.S., record-keeping tended to be somewhat better but there are still many gaps.

For James Lamont, we have a copy of his newspaper obituary in New York state, which was a trove of information, as well as his death record (kept on file in a small town in western New York) which listed his parents' names -- James Lamont and "Ann Mechie." Through the obituary and New York state and federal census records I was able to determine the year of birth (1814, most likely between January and May). While the obituary confirmed he was from Scotland, the only information about where in Scotland he came from was a reference in an 1870s "who's who" of Niagara County, New York, which listed "Knearden" as the family's place of origin in Scotland.

Here are some of the problems I encountered:

• There is no town called "Knearden" in Scotland that I could locate.
• Most Lamonts came from western Scotland -- Argyll. Family lore stated he came from Aberdeen, a small city in the east. But that did not make sense, considering James Lamont took up farm work when he came to America. He did not seem like a city fellow.
• James Lamont was Catholic, an extremely tiny segment of the Scotland's population in the early 1800s (the entire Catholic population of Scotland was estimated at about 30,000 people in the mid-1700s, or about 2% of the population)
• "Mechie" was probably misspelled, and perhaps a variant of Mackie, Mackaye or McKie.

After spending years trying to crack the "brick wall" I contacted the New England Historical Genealogical Society and commissioned their experienced genealogists to see if they could go further. Here's what they found:

We began our research by looking for the birth of James Lamont in Scotland. We were not able to find his record and decided to broaden our scope. Next, we looked for Scottish birth records for children of James and Ann (Mechie) Lamont. We were able to find one birth record for a couple of this name. Donald Lamond, son of James and Anne (Michie) Lamond of Ardoch, was born and baptized on 13 March 1814. Donald was baptized in St. Nathalan Roman Catholic Church in Ballater. The village of Ballater is in the parish of Glenmuick, Tullich and Glengairn in the Kincardine O'Neil district in Aberdeenshire [Aberdeen County], Scotland. Ardoch is located about 2 miles north- west of Ballater. It is possible “Knearden” is referring to the Kincardine O'Neil district. ... Next we turned to passenger arrival records. If James Lamont arrived in New York City about 1850-1851 it was before Castle Garden or Ellis Island were in operation. However, no arrival records was found for James or Helen/Ellen (____) Lamont in currently available digitized sources. It is possible the couple travelled via Canada to Niagara County, New York. Unfortunately, records for this time period in Canada are sparse and nothing was found for the family.

Interesting. The "Knearden" misspelling was plausible -- I could see the editor of a rural "who's who" in New York making the mistake, especially if the source had a heavy accent or wasn't sure of the spelling himself. This could also take care of the issue of James Lamont being a farmer - he wasn't from Aberdeen city, but rather a very rural area of the highlands in Aberdeenshire, a county-like district reaching deep into the Scottish Highlands. Even more interesting was the James Lamond/Ann Michie couple. I had been searching on "Lamont" and ignoring variations, but "Lamond" is actually a common variation. "Michie" is a rare Scottish surname.

Nevertheless, there were still problems with the NEHGS findings. This couple only had one child, born the same year, but with a different name (Donald, not James). What was going on here?

I searched the records of Scotlands People for other children born to this couple. Nothing. This was odd, as most families at the time tended to have many children.

What about this place called Ardoch? It was listed on historical maps:

Now it is only ruins, as shown in this photo collection. It's one of about a dozen abandoned hamlets a few miles north of Ballater in the valley of the river Gairn, known as Glen Gairn or Glengairn. It's not far from Balmoral, the British royal retreat. Until the mid-1800s most of the people of Glengairn were Catholic, in a mostly Protestant Scotland. They were protected by the fact that Glengairn was so remote and several powerful landowners in the area were themselves Catholic. But changes in the economy of the area -- including the creation of "deer forests" for nobles, the expansion of sheep farming, and the sales of large tracts of land -- encouraged many to move elsewhere or emigrate. A large number of Glengairn inhabitants emigrated to Australia, as well as some to Canada. And, perhaps, some to the United States.

As for the origins of the Lamonts in Aberdeenshire, I found this account taken from a 1938 clan history (The Lamont Clan: 1235-1935):

The earliest appearance of a Lamont in the Braemar district was in 1483 when an Archibald was in trouble for cattle lifting. Tradition insists that the first of the clan in that airt was a daughter of a Laird of Lamont who was married about this time to a McGregor of Inverey. Following the old Celtic custom of leine-chneis she took her retainers with her, and so was founded a new branch of the clan still to the fore to this day.

Braemar is located to the west of Ballater, perhaps 10 miles distant -- certainly not out of the realm of possibility for Lamonts from Braemar to settle in the hills north of Ballater.

"Lamond" is apparently a medieval spelling, and the same 1938 account explains more history about the Braemar branch and their connection with the main body of the Lamonts in western Scotland:

(In 1682) the Braemar branch of the clan, realising that Archibald [Lamont] was now a power in the land, applied to him for recognition and protection. Their petition, which is still to the fore in the National Library, is striking evidence of the strength of the bond between chief and clansmen though living beyond the ken of one another. "Ther will be in this countrey of the bray of Marr," it commences, " about fourtie men of our name of MackLamond trewlie come from your honor's country long since and be reason of some accidents hes turned our right name as is knowne to be verie usuall in highland countreys. Wee all of our race knowes our owine genelogie our selfes. Wee live heir honestlie altho' not rich nor in great power be reison we want on above the rest as a cheiffe to owine us & keip us unwronged." The bearer of this appeal, which must have been personally presented at Ardlamont was to explain in detail a particular grievance: “…all these who descended of him were commonly called Gordones, altho' the right name is Lamond. Otheres of us be reason of our predecessor's blackness are called Mcgildui.”

I called a local historian, who confirmed that the Lamonts were "thick around Braemar," not so much around Ardoch or Ballater. There were not any census records of Ardoch or the other forgotten hamlets in the Glen Gairn area, north of Ballater.

One thing I have learned in years of doing research is always look at the original source -- sometimes clues lie in the records themselves which may not be apparent from database searches or second-hand information. So I went to Scotlands People and downloaded an image of the baptism of Donald Lamond, born to James and Ann Michie and recorded by St. Nathalan Catholic church in Ballater:

Transcription listed below

One thing that was immediately apparent was other Lamonts lived in the area closer to Ballater -- a Donald Lamond of Lary was listed as the sponsor (Godfather) while a birth from February 1814 listed another Lamont birth, Margaret, born to Alex Lamont Margaret Farquarson.

I was curious. What was on the other side of the notebook of the baptism list from St. Nathalan? I downloaded it from Scotland's People:

Transcription listed below

Not only were there even more Lamont/Lamond baptisms listed, one of them was a James Lamond, born the same month as the infant Donald. James' parents were Donald Lamond and Helen Farquarson. They resided in another hamlet, Shenval, located less than a mile from Ardoch.

Wow. Was the elder Donald Lamond of Shenval who sponsored infant Donald Lamond the same person as the father of James Lamond? Probably not, as on April 6 1814 another birth was recorded for Donald Lamond of Lary and his wife Elspet Lymon. But considering the closeness of the three hamlets (Ardoch, Shenval and Lary) and the common forenames (two James and three Donalds) suggests some family connection -- most likely brothers and cousins -- is possible, or even likely.

Here are some other hypotheses: Was it possible that infant Donald Lamond had a middle name James, or the infant James Lamond of Shenval was for some reason brought up by James Lamond and Ann Michie of Ardoch? In the 1841 Censuses for the Parish of Crathie and Braemar and the Parish of Glenmuick, Tullich & Glengairn there are no traces of Donald Lamont or Lamond, but there are many households in which infants or young children are living with adults with different surnames -- perhaps relatives, or paid guardians, or orphans. Here is one household in the Glenmuick, Tullich & Glengairn census from 1841:

Enumeration District 5: From the junction of the Gairn with the Dee up the North bank of the Dee until opposite Terquach; thence to the top of the hill above Terquach; then east along the top of the hills above Terquach Micras & Gaelic in a straight line until it reach the Gairn at a point west of Culsh.
Place: Kylacreech
Euphemia Christie 70
Jane [Christie] 50
Jane McHardy 25
Lewis Symon 1

These are hypotheses, not definite answers. Still, the origins of this family loosely match the data we have from James Lamont of Niagara County, NY. The birth year of 1814 matches, and there were no other James Lamonts or Lamonds born that year. James Lamond and Ann Michie were the only couple in Scotland having a similar name to the parents on the Niagara County death certificate -- I did extensive searches of the Scotland's People database to see if any other couples with similar names were recorded, and came up empty. And then there's the family lore, which has the family coming from Aberdeen and the Niagara County book of local notables which lists "Knearden" but is very likely to a misspelling of "Kincardine."

I feel there is a family connection, but more research is needed. The smoking gun could come in several ways:

• Another paper record from Scotland, the U.S. or Canada which confirms something about James' origins.
• A document from the U.S. that states James' exact birthday -- if I can match it with one of the dates in the St. Nathalan records for March 2014, I would have confirmation of the line.
• A DNA match with someone descended from the Aberdeenshire Lamonts/Lamonds. I started this line of research but unfortunately not many Lamont descendents from anywhere are in the 23andme or GEDMatch databases. (Note: if you have Lamont/Lamond/Michie names from Aberdeenshire in your tree, and use genetic genealogy tools, please search for my 23andme profile OR check your GEDmatch kit number against M841892)
• A piece of information from someone reading this blog.

On this last point, if you have something to share relating to James Lamont (James Lamond) or his family, or know more about the Lamonts of Braemar and Glenmuick, Tullich and Glengairn, please write me at ilamont.com@gmail.com.

Transcription of St. Nathalan, Ballater, baptism records from November 1813 to autumn 1814:

November 30, 1813
TO Andrew Thomson and Marge Gordon[Tamedour Grashie?] a daughter 27 [Cur] and baptized Anne. Sponsor John Youll and Ann Callanach  Fergach

Dec 2 1814
To Alex Durevard and Jannet Farquarson [Dyke-head Corgall] a [daughter] born 28 [Ult] and baptized Elisabeth [ipie] & Jane Farquarson [Cochbridge] Sponsor

Feb 20 1814
TO Alex Lamont and Mary Farquarson [Dalduna Corgark] a daughter born 18 [Curt] and baptized Margaret. Alex and Mary MDonald sponspors.

March 5, 1814
To James McGregor and Jannet Mitchie [Clashindrian PG or “Clashinruich” where Father Lachlan McIntosh had a chapel?] a son born 3rd and baptised James. Donald MKenzie here and Jannet MIntosh sposnors.

March 13 1814
To James Lamond and Anne Michie Ardoch a son born this day and baptized Donald. Sponsor Donald Lamond Lary and Mary Duresand Ardoch.

march 21, 1814
To John McIntosh and Jane Shaw [Tonghaoith] Braemar a son born 20 [Cur] and baptized Alexander. Alex and Shusanna Shaw Corgallie Braemar are sponsors.

March 26 1814
To James MHardy and Jannet Lamond Auchindryne Braemar a daughter born 23 Cur and baptized Marg. John and Jannet Lamont their sponsors.

+++++++++++

March 31 1814
To Donald Lamond and Helena Farqu [Ghenvae …] [probably SHENVAL] a son born 28 Cur and baptized James. Sponsor John and Margret Grant, Torran [a hamlet next to Shenval and less than a mile from ARDOCH]

+++++++++++

April 5 1814
To John Lamont and Mary Farquarson [Corga] a son born Cur and baptized Donald ipse Marg Durnward Sponsors

April 6 1814
TO Donald Lamond and Elspet Lymon Lary a daughter born & Cur baptized Elspet. James Donald and Marcelly Lamond Sponsors

June 17 1814
To Jane Fleming Aberarder and one calling himself McDonald whom she never saw before or after. A daughter born May 26 and baptized Agnes ipse and Agnes Fleming Tullochnacraig sponsors.

June 18 1814
To Robert McKay and Ann MHardy Cockbridge [Corgar] a son birn this day and baptized George. [William] MKay Glenlivat and Sophia Wallie Cockbridge, sponsors.

[Next page]

To Alex MDougall and Elisabeth Donald, Lary, a daughter born 24 and baptized Jane. Sponsored James Donald and Jane Donald Lary.

July 3, 1814
To Charles Anderson [Loinchork] and Dianna [xxx] from the south both unmarried a son birn March 31 a baptized Robert Stuart sponsors John Callanach and Anne MGregor [Remerafo]

July 20 1814
To James Callanach nd Mary [Symongleach] a son birn 19. Cur and baptized Alex. Sponsors John Fleming and Mary Ferguson [Auchintoul]

July 27 1814
To Callum Keir and Elisabeth MKenzie, Morven, a son born 24 Cur baptised John. Sponsors John Keir Mulloch and Jane MGregor, Morven

Aug X 1814
To Will Callanach and Jannet Coutts [Gleach] a daughter birn this day and baptized Anne. Sponsor Mary Furguson and Charles Coullyty.

August 28 1814
To William and Anne Michie [or Ritchie] Ardoch a daughter born 27 and baptized Mary. Sponsor Donald Coutts [Benebroch] and Mary Reid, Dalfad

Sept 1 1814
TO Donald McDonald and Elisabeth McGregor [Blarglas] a daughter born 28 and baptized Anne. Sponsor Ann xxx MGregor Morven.

Update: I have published additional posts relating to Aberdeeshire here: Ardoch Scotland revisited (2016) and Ardoch, Scotland in 1830: Recreated map and census (2019)

Synthetic voices for the future

During lunch at the Media Lab last week, I told a friend that synthesized voices will never sound like the real thing. It was in the context of machinima, and an idea that I have been thinking about for the past five years (see the section "3D Modding, 3D Media, on my essay, "Meeting The Second Wave").

"Have you heard Roger Ebert's new voice?" he asked. I hadn't, but knew that the film critic/commentator was unable to speak, owing to the terrible effects of cancer. "Check it out, it's amazing," he said. "They used old clips from his TV shows to build a library for computerized speech."

Intrigued, I did. A demo featuring Roger and his wife, originally played on the Oprah Winfrey show, shows what it's like:



Note there are two synthesized voices he uses -- a synthetic male voice from a standard voice software program, and a new product developed by a Scottish company, CereProc. For decades, until the effects of cancer killed his voice, Roger co-hosted a popular television show that covered new film releases. Through the program, he developed a wonderfully smooth talking and debating voice (he frequently sparred and joked with his first co-host, the late Gene Siskel). CereProc was able to leverage this library of sound, so when Roger types a sentence on his laptop, the program "reads" out what he said, stitching together words from his old television programs.

Is the new speech technology from CereProc perfect? No. But it's much better than the synthetic male voice, and really shows where the technology is heading. I can see people in the future "training" a synthesizer using their own voice (or old audio/video clips) for all sorts of functions. It will be a godsend for people who have lost their ability to speak, but can also be applied to services ranging from voice mail/IVR, news programs based on the "voices" of famous (or obscure) people, and machinima.

More blogging about virtual worlds:

• Hug a Pug: A virtual world lesson for the real world music industry
• The Tiger Woods accident simulated in 3D shows the future of newscasts
• The open-ended first-person shooter: A template for 21st century storytelling?
• Microsoft's virtual worlds strategy: It's the 'Spatial Web', not Second Life
• My new media manifesto: "Meeting the Second Wave"

MIT Media Lab: Robots, and the best Lego set ever

One thing I've wanted to do since arriving at MIT at the beginning of the summer is to see the MIT Media Lab. I mean, I'm a media guy interested in geeky technologies, so it should be one of the first stops, right?

Well, I never got around to going into the Media Lab building, until today. I heard from two non-Sloan friends of mine -- a current PhD candidate studying new ways to do gaming AIs, and a staff member who helped make the world's first robot opera -- that there was a Media Lab open house, in which most of the current projects (and a few past ones, too) would be on display with researchers on hand to explain them.

Firehose time. I spent a few hours visiting the offices and labs, drinking in projects that ranged from anthropomorphic robots (such as Lexi, inset) to a kids-oriented programming language to "tangible media.

Unfortunately, there was no way to see it all. But I was able to shoot a few highlights and conduct some interviews using my iPod touch. There are three videos:

MIT Media Lab Open House Video #1: Scratch + Legos = Cool (interview with researcher Sayamindu Dasgupta from 00:00 to 08:00, for the final two minutes I spend a few minutes looking at other Media Lab projects)



MIT Media Lab Open House Video #2: Social robots! (interview with Personal Robots Group researchers, including Kenton Williams, discussing Nexi and human-social interaction) (note: audio is slightly off-sync)



MIT Media Lab Open House Video #3: An army of robots? (I was unable to find the identity of the PhD student on the Media Lab/Personal Robotics Group website, but I am wondering if that's because of the military sponsor?)



Other MIT classroom encounters:

• An encounter with Tim Berners-Lee and the Semantic Web
• The missing constituency in climate change negotiations
• In case you're wondering what at MIT Sloan accounting exam looks like ...

The missing constituency in climate change negotiations

On Tuesday, about 50 of us from the Sloan Fellows "A" section participated in a fascinating -- and depressing -- climate change simulation. The exercise was based on international negotiations to reverse several global warming trends, as well as a tool called C-ROADS (“Climate Rapid Overview and Decision-support Simulator”). After arriving in a large conference room, we split into groups representing various nations (I was in the India group) and attempted to negotiate a climate treaty that balanced our national interests with the global imperative to reverse the amount of carbon entering the atmosphere. The C-ROADS tool, which was developed by MIT and several partner organizations, has actually been used by governments and NGOs to model policy actions and their impact on long-term greenhouse gas emissions and sea level changes (I've embedded a video below that explains how it works.)

If you paid attention to the horse trading and bickering that took place at Copenhagen last year, you are probably aware that it was impossible to get everyone on board. In the India group, we had several obstacles which prevented us from willingly signing on to aggressive reduction targets. Our briefing document instructed us to preserve economic growth at all costs, and we also had to be cognizant of the fact that India's population will actually surpass China's at some point mid-century, according to the projections we were given. We unsuccessfully attempted to tie the negotiations into demands for technology transfer and an end to European agricultural barriers. In the end, with a little arm-twisting and urging from the facilitator (Sloan professor John Sterman), we gave up these demands and signed on to more aggressive targets. In the C-ROADS simulation, this resulted in a reversal of several trends and a much smaller degree of global warming. The earth was saved!

Not so fast, Sterman said. He gave us an uncomfortable reality check about international climate negotiations: There is little chance all of these agreements would be ratified by the legislatures of the democratic countries that took part in the negotiations. This is because an important stakeholder has not been brought on board: The public. Many people are either not convinced of the need for drastic action, fear the negative economic impacts, or may resent the fact that some countries are receiving unequal treatment, even though they have contributed more to global warming in the past.

After the four-hour session ended, everyone in the room was amazed at what we had just participated in, but depressed about the implications. Is there nothing that can be done? A lot of fellows thought hard about this as we left the building. I actually had a few ideas that targeted the public awareness issue, and sent the following email to Sterman:

Your presentation yesterday afternoon was quite powerful and left a big impression on me and many of the other fellows.

I just wanted to add a few observations about getting through to the public, which you touched upon toward the end of your presentation. I come from an online news background and have some observations with how traditional mass media as well as new media tools can be used to reach the public.

The first is that, perversely, the visuals from the Deep Horizon disaster and the aftermath have probably done more to turn people to sustainability-related causes than any other event in the past ten years. The live video from the well location has been particularly disturbing for the many millions of people who have seen it. It illustrates everything that is wrong with offshore drilling and drives many people to ask the question: What are the alternatives?

The second observation is that visuals like these are often far more effective than data or prose in terms of bringing home the message about something like environmental change. As one of the other fellows told me as we left the Marriott, “instead of showing a simulation involving bar charts or maps, why not show images of people drowning?” It may seem like a strange idea, but creating a simulation of real areas being inundated or ruined by a breach would be very effective, even if no actual deaths were depicted. There are some graphics technologies related to video game design which could actually help do this — imagine a sim of New York City partially under water, or a massive breach overtaking water control features in Holland, Venice, Sacto, etc. This is the type of thing that has a large potential to either A) be picked up by major broadcast news outlets (especially in locales that are depicted) or B) “go viral” on YouTube and Facebook.

The third observation is that C-ROADS is an excellent tool for getting a global view of the problem, but there needs to be a simulation tool or tools for people to see how they will be personally affected by global warming. For instance, how about a simulation that lets people type in their address, and spits out an estimation of whether or not their home is under water, the estimated decline in value or increase in insurance costs, the impact on their community (refugee resettlement, difference in snow/rain/drought days) and even what sort of plants they can expect to see disappear from their garden, as well as new plants that will take their place?

Sterman's response was interesting. While visuals have been helpful in informing the public (he mentioned scientist-turned filmmaker Randy Olsen) he also sent a paper that he authored for Science magazine that noted the following contradiction in public attitudes toward global warming:

"Majorities in the United States and other nations have heard of climate change and say they support action to address it, yet climate change ranks far behind the economy, war, and terrorism among people’s greatest concerns, and large majorities oppose policies that would cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by raising fossil fuel prices."

According to Sterman, another important constituency that needs to be handled with care are scientists themselves. He didn't get too far into this issue, but it's not hard to see why this is so: Different stakeholders respond to different messages and data points, and dramatizations intended for the general public will not work with people who are used to dealing with complex data and peer-reviewed research.

Video: John Sterman on C-ROADS Science and Confidence Building

John Sterman on C-ROADS Science and Confidence Building from Climate Interactive on Vimeo. MIT's John Sterman of the Climate Interactive team explains C-ROADS science and confidence building at the US State Department side event in Copenhagen. Image: Data points from C-ROADS

A genealogy kit for the 21st century

I don't consider myself a genealogy pro. But over the past 11 years I've worked with a lot of traditional and new technology tools and have managed to build a fairly detailed family tree (700+ names to date, with the earliest going back to the 1700s) through interviews, examination of primary source materials such as photographs and vital records, and increasingly, using Internet-based resources as well as cheap software and digital devices. This post is intended to provide readers with a modern genealogy kit that can be used to build and/or expand their family trees in an organized fashion -- and share the results with relatives.

Overview

It's a tremendous amount of fun uncovering new names and facts about forebears. Another enjoyable aspect is being able to share new findings with kids, parents, siblings and cousins. Everyone in my family has been interested in the new names and connections that I've managed to dig up, and it's not surprising why: People in the United States are intensely curious about their origins. This has always been true, but in recent years the interest has spiked, thanks to media and technology trends. Consider the popularity of TV shows like History Detectives and the new PBS series "Faces of America," NBC's upcoming series "Who Do You Think You Are?" as well as the millions of users of Ancestry.com and other genealogy websites.

The following genealogy kit is a list of tools and techniques that I've found to be effective for amateur genealogical research. It's not a comprehensive list, but should be enough for people who are curious about their origins and want to understand how technology can help them get started.

One thing to keep in mind as you look at this list: Genealogy basically boils down to finding, organizing, and sharing information, tasks for which computers and digital technologies are extremely well suited. However, the best genealogical tools at your disposal are your human connections. I could learn more about my ancestors in a one-hour conversation with my aunt than I could with a one-year subscription to Ancestry.com. Living people are far more likely to know certain details that aren't stored in databases or vital records, and can often answer that critical question about the deceased: "What was he/she like"? Therefore, the starting point for any genealogical research should be living relatives (especially older ones) who can hopefully fill in basic names, family details, and places of origin going back a few generations, can identify people in old family photos, and can also paint pictures of their personalities.

In-person interviewing tools: Video cameras and digital audio recorders

In the mid-1980s, my mother did something that would later kick-start my first organized foray into genealogy. She recorded a series of interviews with her father (my grandfather) on a cheap audio cassette recorder. I found the cassettes in 1999, many years after he had died. They were a treasure trove of information, and illustrated how important face-to-face interviews could be. But they also illustrated a problem with the technology: Physical media quickly become obsolete. I saved the audio by converting them to mp3s, but what if I had discovered the tapes 10 years later? Would they have been playable? Would I still have a cassette player to play them back with?

Now, when I do interviews, I try to use a storage technology that can be directly stored on a hard drive, uploaded, or transferred via websites and email using a common, established software format. It's not a guarantee against obsolescence, but it's far more likely that the files can converted to other modern formats and/or converted back to physical media for the purpose of sharing or backups. With tapes or discs, they may deteriorate or not have a machine conveniently able to play them back in 10 years' time. But mp3, .wav, and mpeg video formats have been around for at least 10 years, and will almost certainly be compatible with playback software in the year 2020.  

For video, Flip's cheap cameras come with a built-in USB jack for easy file transfer. You don't need any extra software -- the first time you slot it into your computer it will install software for viewing and transfering files. It also works with QuickTime media software on the Mac. Even better, they are extremely easy to set up. Unlike every camera made by a major Japanese manufacturer, the U.S.-designed Flip has a simple UI that requires no manual. The interface is dominated by a single button that a five-year-old can figure out (I'm not kidding). For a genealogy interview, it's a cinch to start the video rolling, place it on a nearby table pointing at the subject, and start talking. I am embedding a video below that I made a few years ago that shows how to use one.



For audio, the best devices are those that are easy to operate, create clear recordings, and use a standard software format that can be read by any computer. As a journalist, I have used several Olympus devices, which have reasonably good sound quality and create files in standard .wav format. However, they require special client software to operate, which is a big negative - installation is a pain, and the UI is mediocre.

I do NOT recommend using a BlackBerry for recording audio or video. The quality is terrible, and the video format is a proprietary one (mine creates .3GP files) that cannot be instantly read or converted by your computer. Further, installing BlackBerry media software on Windows computers is a buggy, frustrating mess.

Another alternative is using a PC or laptop-mounted video camera for interviews. The problem with this approach is the setup is a pain and it can be distracting or off-putting for the interview subjects, especially if the playback is displayed on screen. The last thing you want is for people to clam up or be distracted by technology when the interview is taking place. For the same reason, mounting a videocamera on a tripod or holding one up to your face as you do an interview will often result in an uncomfortable interview at first.

Phone/remote interviews: If you are unable to conduct an interview in person, the next best thing is to use the phone or an Internet service like Skype. If the subject is willing, try to record the conversation. Google Voice allows this with certain conditions (the subject has to call you, not the other way around), or you can use speakerphone with a digital voice recorder running. Be sure to ask the subject if it's OK to record the conversation before you start (it's not only a legal requirement, it's the right thing to do). If it's not possible take notes during the conversation and immediately after the call fill in additional details before you forget them.

Digital cameras: When I did a small genealogy tour last summer in New York state, one of the tools in my daypack was a digital camera with a 1 GB media card and a miniature extendable tripod. The camera was very useful for taking pictures of relatives, gravestones, and houses that were built by or inhabited by ancestors. On one occasion, it served as a makeshift scanner to take close-up pictures of documents that I couldn't take with me. A decent camera is a great way to preserve details for later examination, and I've also used the images in family genealogy books that I've distributed to relatives. Lastly, a camera is a good way to engage young people or other enthusiastic relatives who want to take part -- have them take the pictures of buildings, gravestones, and people while you take notes or conduct interviews.

I don't have any specific brand recommendations for cameras (you can browse Amazon's latest selection here). If you don't have one already, buy one that is good in low-light situations and has a high-quality setting (high-resolution pictures are important for copying photos, documents, and taking pictures of headstone inscriptions). For a lightweight collapsable tripod, I can recommend some of the Giotto tripods. The model I have weighs about two pounds, and is about the size of large, thick carrot. Collapsed, it can be used for document or photograph scanning (see inset image). Extended, it's about five feet tall.

Software

A good family tree program is crucial for any serious genealogical effort. Paper files and hand-drawn trees are useful, but they are limited by several factors, such as limited sharing and cross-referencing options. Mac or PC software can help organize the enourmous amount of family names and associated data that turn up over the years, and create extremely useful reports and charts.

I cannot recommend any PC program. For OS X, I use Reunion for Mac. It's an adequate program, but suffers from a overly complex and somewhat dated UI. The reports that it generates are useful but require a lot of tweaking. But the cost (about $100) is worth it -- I could not organize the data and be as productive as I have been in my research without it.

A third software option for family trees is online tools, such as Ancestry.com. I will address those in the next section.

Online tools

When it comes to the Web, there are a few types of applications used for genealogy. Research is the one most people are familiar with, but some people use websites to organize and store their families' genealogical data.

The reasons for organizing trees online are compelling. It's easier to share and connect trees with other researchers. There is no need to install software, because it's accessed through a standard Web browser. You can change computers at will, without transferring family data between machines. You don't have to worry about your hard drive going on the fritz, because it's stored on someone else's server.

But the downsides are significant. The number one concern is security. Spectacular failures of online services that store personal data have occurred in the past (see this story about the Microsoft/Sidekick fiasco). It's also not hard for someone to inadvertently wipe out their own trees with a few misplaced clicks. In either scenario, if the data isn't backed up, the result can be years of painstaking work flushed down the digital toilet.

An additional aspect of security for the online genealogical services is public access to private data. I support the idea of sharing select family tree data, but it should not be the default option, and online services should take a stricter approach to publishing names and connections relating to living people.

Another drawback to the online services is you don't know where they will be in a year's time. Business models, hosting charges, M&A activity or other factors may result in servers being taken offline or data being moved. Or, policies may change, as Ancestry.com's EULA makes clear:

Ancestry has the right, at its sole discretion, to modify this Agreement or the Service, including the Content of the Service, at any time.

In other words, prices may go up, certain features may be cut, or other changes may happen. When they do, users will either have to live with the consequences or go through the hassle of transferring or rebuilding the data somewhere else.

When it comes to research, genealogy websites can help you dig up some marvelous facts and insights. I have been able to locate records that I wouldn't have been able to find on my own, such as a document relating to my great-grandfather's WWI draft record. But Ancestry.com has lots of problems as described in my Ancestry.com review from two years ago. Other sites, such as some of the uploaded family trees found on Rootsweb or personal genealogy websites, are not adequately sourced -- it's not clear where the names or dates came from, which makes them difficult to verify or trust as being accurate.

In addition, a lot of people mistakenly think that research should start online and the only data worth finding is in Ancestry.com's database and elsewhere online. In actuality, the best genealogical research information is lying right under most people's noses, either in the form of living relatives who know about family origins and personalities, or photographs, letters, and other documents lying around in attics and old folders. Tackle these sources first, as well as easily accessible vital records and graves, before spending a lot of time online. The data you get will be richer and more reliable, and it will help you hone your online searches without wasting too much time.

My other blog posts about genealogy-related technology:

• Ancestry.com review
• Google/Ancestry.com followup: Using outsourced Chinese labor to overcome OCR limits
• The reality of online genealogy research: Data is limited
• Genealogy software: Reunion for Mac

How fast is the social Web growing?

Wicked. Darn. Fast.

Play around with the tool below. Click on the one-day option, to see how much has been spent on virtual goods, or how many YouTube videos have been watched. The numbers are astounding. Check out the other tabs, too, for mobile and gaming. 16 billion SMS messages sent worldwide since yesterday? Now we know why Verizon and other carriers charge so much for data and texting!



Link: John Bothwick

Louis Menand and the American PhD problem

When reading magazines in the evening, I don't usually mark up articles with notes, highlighted sections, and other marginalia, but the most recent issue of Harvard Magazine features a book excerpt that absolutely warrants it.

The excerpt is from Professor Louis Menand's forthcoming book, The Marketplace of Ideas: Reform and Resistance in the American University, and examines various problems afflicting the American PhD system. I was skeptical at first (he presented some generalizations about advanced professional and liberal arts degrees with which I disagreed) but his arguments and use of educational data were ultimately quite convincing.

His thesis: The supply/demand equation for PhD students in the humanities and some social sciences fields has been thrown excessively out of whack since 1970 thanks to a number of factors, including a decreased need for specialists (not so many undergraduate English majors to teach now, compared to 40 years ago) and the near absence of demand for PhDs outside of academia in many fields.

Another problem highlighted by Menand is the huge amount of time that most graduate students in the humanities take to finish their degree requirements -- nine or ten is typical for an English major, compared to three years for a law degree. He writes:

"That it takes longer to get a Ph.D. in the humanities than it does in the social or natural sciences (although those fields also have longer times-to-degree than they once did) seems anomalous, since normally a dissertation in the humanities does not require extensive archival, field, or laboratory work. William Bowen and Neil Rudenstine, in their landmark study In Pursuit of the Ph.D., suggested that one reason for this might be that the paradigms for scholarship in the humanities have become less clear. People are uncertain just what research in the humanities is supposed to constitute, and graduate students therefore spend an inordinate amount of time trying to come up with a novel theoretical twist on canonical texts or an unusual contextualization. Inquiry in the humanities has become quite eclectic without becoming contentious. This makes it a challenge for entering scholars to know where to make their mark."

Menand's conclusions are ultimately quite logical: The processes governing the PhD system are inefficient, and society ultimately loses. Some of his quotes:

"... there is a huge social inefficiency in taking people of high intelligence and devoting resources to training them in programs that half will never complete and for jobs that most will not get."

And:

"The obstacles to entering the academic profession are now so well known that the students who brave them are already self-sorted before they apply to graduate school. A college student who has some interest in further education, but who is unsure whether she wants a career as a professor, is not going to risk investing eight or more years finding out. The result is a narrowing of the intellectual range and diversity of those entering the field, and a widening of the philosophical and attitudinal gap that separates academic from non-academic intellectuals. Students who go to graduate school already talk the talk, and they learn to walk the walk as well. There is less ferment from the bottom than is healthy in a field of intellectual inquiry. Liberalism needs conservatism, and orthodoxy needs heterodoxy, if only in order to keep on its toes."

Finally, the excerpt reads:

"It is important for research and teaching to be relevant, for the university to engage with the public culture and to design its investigative paradigms with actual social and cultural life in view. That is, in fact, what most professors try to do—even when they feel inhibited from saying so by the taboo against instrumentalist and presentist talk. Professors teach what they teach because they believe that it makes a difference. To continue to do this, academic inquiry, at least in some fields, may need to become less exclusionary and more holistic. That may be the road down which the debates I have been describing are taking higher education.

But at the end of this road there is a danger, which is that the culture of the university will become just an echo of the public culture. That would be a catastrophe. It is the academic’s job in a free society to serve the public culture by asking questions the public doesn’t want to ask, investigating subjects it cannot or will not investigate, and accommodating voices it fails or refuses to accommodate. Academics need to look to the world to see what kind of teaching and research needs to be done, and how they might better train and organize themselves to do it. But they need to ignore the world’s demand that they reproduce its self-image."

Menand's concerns are valid. There absolutely is room for open thinking, improvement, and outright reform in graduate education, as well as in the dissemination and discussion of ideas and research.

At the same time, I have to wonder what sorts of marvelous research, insights and knowledge transfer would be stifled were the American PhD system mechanically aligned to the supply/demand curve. My bookshelves and hard drives contain some remarkable, thought-provoking works on the impact of printing on European society, the rise of virtual communities based on commercial videogames, and modern Chinese history that started out as obscure dissertations or post-doc research projects. Would such scholarship exist in a more rigid environment? I'm not so sure. While technology opens up many possibilities for independent research and publishing endeavors, the sheltering, supportive and serendipitous environments found in graduate school programs across the country are where the sparks of transformative ideas are more likely to be struck, fanned, and fed.

An academic gets a rise from "breaching experiments" in City of Heroes/City of Villains

(Update at bottom) This is interesting. A university professor has released a sociology study (which will soon be made into a book) using players in the MMORPG City of Heroes/City of Villains as research subjects (see video at the bottom of this article which shows gameplay). I saw it discussed on Hacker News, and read the article on nola.com that prompted the debate. After reading the 2008 research paper ("Play and Punishment: The sad and curious case of Twixt") I thought that I would give some analysis here on my blog, and add some of my own thoughts regarding academic ethics.

From a high-level examination, the study seems harmless. In it, Loyola professor David Myers exploited differences between the online game's official rules (mostly governing gameplay and competition) and unofficial rules (mostly player-created social norms) to study group behavior. Starting in late 2006, he used his player to build specific scenarios and observed the reactions of other participants.

But drilling down to his methodology, the study veers into uncomfortable territory. Myers didn't just play the game, he actually used his hero character "Twixt" to sabotage other people's enjoyment by violating the game's unofficial social norms. In other words, he took the role of an antisocial griefer to an extreme in order to drive social and emotional reactions, which he then used to support his thesis.

Here's how Myers describes his methodology:

These three sets of behaviors – rigidly competitive pvp tactics (e. g., droning), steadfastly uncooperative social play outside the game context (e. g., refusing to cooperate with zone farmers), and steadfastly uncooperative social play within the game context (e. g., playing solo and refusing team invitations) – marked Twixt’s play from the play of all others within RV.

Translation: He killed other players in situations that were allowed by the game's creators but frowned upon by the majority of real-life participants. For instance, "villains" and "heroes" aren't supposed to fraternize, but they do anyway. When "Twixt" happened upon these and other situations -- such as players building points by taking on easy missions against computer-generated enemies -- he would ruin them, often by "teleporting" players into unwinnable killzones. The other players would either die or have their social relations disrupted. Further, "Twixt" would rub it in by posting messages like:

"Yay, heroes. Go good team. Vills lose again."

The reaction was overwhelmingly negative. People used message boards and in-game chat to tell Twixt how much he was hated, what a terrible player he was, and worse. While Myers was technically following the rules of permitted gameplay, he was violating the rules of conduct to such a degree that even heroes were begging for villains to kill Twixt in the game.

There were also some extremely disturbing reactions to the experiment. Myers received at least one threat to kill him in real life, although it's not certain if the player who said this was being serious, as Myers' real identity was not known to other players at the time. This video interview with Myers discusses the incident:

Computer Game Threat

All in the name of science, right? Anyway, here is how Myers' summed up the implications of his experiments:

In real-world environments, "natural" laws governing social relationships, if they exist at all, are part of the same social system in which they operate and, for that reason, are difficult to isolate, measure, and confirm. In Twixt’s case, however, two unique sets of rules – one governing the game system, one governing the game society -- offered an opportunity to observe how social rules adapt to system rules (or, more speculatively, how social laws might reproduce natural laws.) And, the clearest answer, based on Twixt’s experience, is that they don’t. Rather, if game rules pose some threat to social order, these rules are simply ignored. And further, if some player -- like Twixt -- decides to explore those rules fully, then that player is shunned, silenced, and, if at all possible, expelled.

I had a couple of additional thoughts about Myers' study. When I was in grad school, we devoted some time during the required proseminar to academic ethics. As I recall, experiments in which subjects were not made aware they were taking part in an experiment were to be treated very cautiously. The example that was brought up in class was a 60s-era study that involved a researcher monitoring the activities of men having sex in a public restroom that was known as a pickup spot for anonymous rendezvous. Such a study could not happen now without raising red flags, owing to privacy and consent issues. While Myers' research did not infringe upon players' intimate lives, he apparently did not get their consent and he did not reveal that he was an academic conducting research.

There is also the emotional element to consider. He was manipulating people's feelings for the sake of an experiment. That seems questionable, despite the suggestion in the nola.com article that he was surprised people reacted the way they did.

I believe Myers anticipated he would draw an overwhelmingly negative emotional reaction before he even started his "breaching experiments." It's not just that people hate to lose. Myers has studied video games since the 1980s, and played City of Heroes/City of Villains for thousands of hours before he started his research. Surely he knew that killing other players in such a fashion went beyond griefing -- these virtual characters are representations of the people who play them, and the advanced characters have taken huge chunks of personal time to build. The article on nola.com notes that "Myers was stunned by the reaction, since he obeyed the game's rules." This seems a bit hollow. After all, he acknowledged that his methodology employed "steadfastly uncooperative" tactics -- what was he expecting, a medal? The social rules may not be explicit as the official game rules, but he must have expected negative consequences for violating them in such a manner, just as employing uncooperative behavior in a real-world situation would prompt negative or even angry reactions from others.

Update 7/7/2009: I found Professor Myers' blog, and a post in which he addresses the academic ethics involved in his research. First, he suggests that this is not technically an "experiment":

... this study is not really an experiment. I label it as a “breaching experiment” in reference to analogous methods of Garfinkel, but, in fact, neither his nor my methods are experimental in any truly scientific sense. This should be obvious in that experimental methods require some sort of control group and there was none in this case. Likewise, experimental methods are characterized by the manipulation of a treatment variable and, likewise, there was none in this case.

He goes on to claim that the lack of consent from the people in his research does not constitute an ethical breach:

The matter of informed consent in this case, because of the reasons above, is really more of a legal than an ethical issue. You will note that I reveal no real-life identities. Nor do I use player globals. The names of toons I do include in the paper are entirely immaterial to the paper’s content and could easily be changed – which I am quite willing to do, though I think it will make little practical difference to the players involved. Most of them, I think, would rather have the names in rather than out. None of them, after all, despite the claims of some, were “treated” or “manipulated” or “harmed” in any way. They were simply observed in how they played within the zone, similar, perhaps, to observing how people shop inside a shopping mall.

This is a false comparison. The players were not "simply observed," they were subjected to what he calls "steadfastly uncooperative" behavior. If he were to employ corresponding behaviors in a shopping mall, the result would almost certainly be verbal abuse from mall patrons and ejection from the property for harassment.

Finally, he refers to a Terra Nova discussion on informed consent, which is a great read. However, he did not follow the same rules of engagement as Terra Nova author Constance Steinkuehler, who says:

My general MO to date has been to keep the lines between my professional identity and my Lineage identity transparent to whoever is interested, treating in-game disclosure of information about my 'academic' life the same way I treat academic disclosure of details about my 'game' life, based on the notion that I am bound to both communities to be generally forthright about what I do.

Feel free to add your thoughts below about these issues.

A video of the gameplay in City of Heroes/City of Villains:

The reality of online genealogy research: Data is limited

As I continue on my family research project using Reunion for Mac and the Web, a cold reality has set in: There is relatively little data online, especially from important vital records and census returns. This page from the Niagara County, NY GenWeb Project sums up the roadblock I have encountered:

"Few freely available census transcriptions are online for Niagara County."

I have been able to find some family data from the 1880 Federal Census for one branch from my father's side (via the LDS FamilySearch.org website), but other branches don't have any online records from the same source, meaning they haven't been uploaded, or, for whatever reason, the family members weren't counted.

Another reality about online genealogy research is that many records from individual families or from cemetery transcriptions exist on personal websites. These can be useful but there is always the danger that they will disappear when the hosting company shuts down a page that hasn't been updated in years, or the owner decides to pull the plug. For that reason, I am saving any such pages that look remotely connected to my research, so at least I'll have them on my hard drive for future reference.

Microsoft's 'Spatial Web'

At EmTech '08 yesterday, I heard Microsoft's research and strategy chief talk about the company's cutting-edge technologies. Craig Mundie spent a fair amount of time discussing cloud computing and advances in programming, but I was particularly interested in his discussions of 3D-related technologies. For years, I have been writing about virtual worlds and 3D tools, and observing how companies both big and small have been developing products and trying different business models. Google, Intel, Sony, Linden Lab, and Sun Microsystems have been very visible in this sector, but Microsoft has been a bit of an enigma ... until yesterday.

Mundie basically said that the user-generated virtual worlds which are popular now -- Second Life and the like -- are not scalable in the sense that lots of people will be interested in creating avatars and virtual objects. Rather, he thinks killer apps will be centered around the "Spatial Web," a virtual representation of the real world that uses the Internet, cloud computing, and new interfaces. Key to the creation of the Spatial Web will be Photosynth, a really neat modeling tool that I have covered here on my blog. Photosynth figured heavily in Mundie's demonstration at MIT yesterday. Here's what he showed in his demo:

In one brief demo he showed how a small, camera-equipped robot could be used to model a large room. In another, he showed a 3D model of a commercial district in Seattle that had been created with Photosynth, and demonstrated how a virtual visitor could come to the district using the Internet, enter an art shop in the area, and examine and buy a virtual sculpture that had also been "photosynthed" by the shop clerks or the artist.

You can read the rest of my Industry Standard article here, and I have a brief video from Mundie's demo below, showing how his staff created a 3D model of a real place (a room at MIT) using a camera-equipped robot.



A few other quotes from Mundie's presentation, which I did not include in the TIS article:

How does Microsoft view the future?

"What is the killer application and what is the user engagement model that drives adoption?"

On cloud computing:

"More and more, computing will be model based, rather than discrete applications."

On user interfaces:

Microsoft is looking for the "NUI to replace the GUI"

The end of the Long Tail? I don't think so

Chris Anderson's Long Tail theory is under attack by a Harvard Business School professor named Anita Elberse, and a lot of people are only too glad to pile on.

The Long Tail is a social and business paradigm which stresses the ability of obscure, niche content to find markets online. Read the column by the Wall Street Journal's Lee Gomes, who describes the HBS counterargument.

Besides conducting statistical analysis, Elberse also notes some conflicts in the qualitative arena, notes Gomes:

In addition to her data crunching, Prof. Elberse reminded readers of substantial bodies of qualitative social research that suggest "The Long Tail" may have been wrong in its description of what makes consumers tick. The book implies that readers and movie viewers are eager to cast off the shackles imposed by physical inventory so they can frolic among the thousands or millions of titles in the Long Tail.

But Prof. Elberse describes research showing that even in our cultural consumption we tend to be intensely social folks. We like experiencing the same things that other people are experiencing -- and the mere fact that other people are experiencing and liking something makes us like it even more. Far from being cultural rugged individualists, most of us are only too happy to have others suggest to us what we'd like.

Gomes himself seems to feel a sense of schadenfreude at seeing Anderson's theory being knocked down, which disappointed me -- I have read Gomes' columns in the print edition of the WSJ for years, and his tone in this case is uncalled for. Moreover, Anderson's theory may be under attack, but he hasn't conclusively been proven wrong (you can read his counterarguments on his Long Tail blog).

Based on my own professional and personal experience using the Web, I think Anderson really is onto something with his original theory. Niche content can be successful online for products or communities that would have had little chance of surviving in the physical, pre-net world.

In other words, the Long Tail ain't dead yet. We're only on chapter 2, and the final pages won't be written for many years, until more data is in -- and more people shift their shopping and media habits to the online world.

The Boston Digital Media Summit on Immersive Education

I wanted to let readers in the Boston area know about a special event taking place at Boston College next weekend. It's the Boston Digital Media Summit. The focus of the summit is Immersive Education, related virtual reality and digital media technologies, and pedagogy.

Just a few weeks ago, I attended a smaller event on Immersive Education at Harvard that was hosted by the Harvard Interactive Media Group. The Boston College event is more extensive. There are two full days of demonstrations, panels, and presentations on Saturday, January 12 and Sunday, January 13. On the second day, I'll be participating in two of the panels and giving a presentation relating to one of my research interests, the video game generation and their media habits (see MMORPGs training "Generation G" for corner-office suites and My new media manifesto: "Meeting the Second Wave"). The summit is being sponsored by The Grid Institute, the Woods College of Advancing Studies at Boston College, and the Federation of American Scientists with the Kauffman Foundation.

There is a tentative program for the Boston Digital Media Summit, and registration is now open.

Next week, I'll post more details about the event and generate a map for people who are unfamiliar with the BC campus.

Generation G

On The Digital Media Machine blog, I recently discussed Generation G -- the under-40s who belong to the video game generation. According to my definition,

... Most people in this demographic grew up with games, and many of them still play now. They are familiar with gaming conventions relating to movement, exploration, cooperation, competition, and communication. Additionally, interaction with video games from an early age has created a foundation of familiarity and interest in computing technologies.

While I noted that more than 80 million people in the United States belong to this demographic, I did not get into the international dimension. U.S. Census Bureau data says there were nearly 4.5 billion people under the age of 40 as of mid-2007. Obviously, many of those in developing countries may never have seen a video game console or touched a computer, but in other countries parts of Europe and Asia, video games, computers, and the Internet are a way of life for people in this age group.

The ESWN blog found a report that supports the Generation G hypothesis in Taiwan. The United Daily News (lian he bao, 聯合報) reported the results of a telephone survey of 15,007 people from all over Taiwan that polled them on their 'Net habits, and broke down the results by age. The inset graphic is from the United Daily News website, and shows the data. Not surprisingly, almost 100% of the youngest bracket (aged 12 to 20) were Internet users. Most of the 21-30 and 31-40 groups were also online. But there was a steep dropoff from the 30-somethings to the 40-somethings, and just over one in five of the over-50s were online:

Age 12-20: 99.8%
Age 21-30: 94.4%
Age 31-40: 84.2%
Age 41-50: 58.6%
Age 51+: 21.9%

The survey also asked about blogging, and I was quite surprised to see how active Taiwan's teenagers were in this respect: Nearly half of the 12-20 year olds said they blog, and about 30% of 20-somethings do the same. 30-somethings in Taiwan are far less likely to blog, with just 12.5% saying that they maintain one. This matches with my own experience -- most of my Taiwanese friends are in their 30s and 40s, and I only know one who has a blog.

Robots, cockroaches, and bug peer pressure

What do you get when you mix robots, roaches, and the insects' socialization instincts? According to the New York Times, Lemming-like behavior that encourages the bugs to deny safety-related instincts:

When 16 cockroaches were placed in the arena, they naturally gravitated toward the darker disc, following what the researchers believe is an internal calculation of the amount of light and the number of other roaches, finding comfort in company.

Dr. Halloy then replaced four of the cockroaches with four robots equipped with sensors to measure light and the proximity of other robots. When the robots emulated the real roaches, the group continued to seek the dark and crowded place.

When the four robotic roaches were reprogrammed to prefer the lighter disc, however, the real roaches followed them about 60 percent of the time, in essence deferring their own judgment as the preference grew more popular. (The other 40 percent of the time, the robotic roaches succumbed to peer pressure and headed for the darkest place.)

I am trying to think up some practical applications here ... pest control services that more effectively entice roaches to come out from under stoves and refrigerators?