I'm at the Supernova 2004 conferenceat the moment. I'm scribbling notes as I go, and plan to go backand cohere the highlights into a post-conference writeup. Firstimpressions: Lots of smart and articulate people here, both onthe panels and in the 'audience'. I wish there were more time foraudience participation, though there is plenty of time for informalinteractions between and after sessions. The more panel-like sessions are better than the formal presentations.
The Syndication Nation panel had some good points, but itratholed a bit on standard issues and would have benefited from alonger term/wider vision. How to pay for content is important,but it's a well trodden area. We could just give it a code name,like a chess opening, and save a lot of discussion time...
I am interested in the Autonomic Computing discussion and relatedtopics, if for no other reason than we really need to be able to focussmart people on something other than how to handle and recover fromsystem issues. It's addressing the technical complexityproblem.
Next problem: The legal complexity problem (IP vs. IP:Intellectual Property Meets the Internet Protocol) - I think thisproblem is far harder because it's political. There's no goodsolution in sight for how to deal with the disruptions technology arecausing business models and the structure of IP law.
And, on a minor note, I learned the correct pronunciation of Esther Dyson's first name.