From Dr. John: To mark the 40th anniversary of the Internets, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has announced the DARPA Network Challenge, a competition that will explore the role of social networking in communication, team building, and group mobilization. The challenge is to be the first person to submit the locations of 10 8-foot, red, weather balloons at 10 fixed locations in the continental United States.

Here’s how it works: The red balloons will be deployed on Saturday, December 5, in readily accessible locations and visible from nearby roads. Teams and collaborators will have approximately 9 days, until 12:00 PM (ET) on December 14, to collect the locations of the balloons and submit their entries.  All locations must be submitted in latitude and longitude coordinates. The event is open to individuals of all ages irrespective of nationality or residency (except Federal employees and their spouses and dependents), but first you must register your team on  the DARPA Network Challenge website.

Find the red balloons. Win $40,000. Do you have what it takes to be the next Balloon Boy/Girl?

Here’s Stephen’s report on the growing trend to bridge natural and social sciences.

The National Humanities Center sponsors On The Human, a collaborative project that brings together humanists and scientists to explore the shifting relationship between “persons and the quasi-persons who surround us.”  By “quasi-persons” they don’t mean our own social deviants or oddball neighbors — instead, they refer to non-human animals and even “machine-based virtual life.”  Now, even if you find some of the wording peculiar, hopefully we’ll agree that On The Human serves a valuable and timely purpose.

Several scientific disciplines, such as neuroscience and biomedical engineering, share two traits that make On The Human particularly relevant today.  First, they are in the midst of rapid growth periods; and, second, they are informing age-old questions about human nature that were previously ruled by something we might call (with no offense to our forefathers intended) “conjecture.”  For the vast majority of human history, theories of personhood were generally unbounded, but now we have far less leeway: every week studies are published that force us to update our worldview by incorporating newly learned facts.

Maintaining theoretical consistency during an influx of novel findings is not merely a job for armchair philosophers or those prone to idle conversation.  Sociologists are always interested in situations surrounding groups that are forced to question their  place in the world because, for the most part, lively things tend to happen as a result.  To date, no one has been forced to consider what the consequences are of an entire species going through that process; but, if we are indeed facing major ideological shifts brought on by scientific discoveries, we’re best served by being informed and engaged at the onset.  On The Human, serving as a bridge between the humanities and the sciences, helps frame the conversation with articles, news updates, and free resources.

A good starting point is Ian Hacking’s article on commercial genome sequencing and identity.  This brand of philosophy, linking old questions with modern science and current events, is refreshing and certainly worth a read if you were interested in Darlene’s post on Knome.  On The Human also offers a free undergraduate course, which is something we can all appreciate.

On a related note, Arizona State was recently awarded a grant by the National Science Foundation to study the nature and benefits of interdisciplinary research.  An initial group of ten doctoral candidates will bring varying backgrounds in the sciences and humanities to the laboratory environment, and the investigators hope to produce an assessment of their work that will benefit collaborative endeavors of the future.  We should be particularly encouraged by the fact that the principle investigators are keeping a close eye on how “interdisciplinary collaborations can assist in stimulating laboratories’ responsiveness to public values.”

May I share something with you? Don’t tell anyone, ok?  When it comes to the gossip see-saw, I’ve been on top, crashed to the bottom and had to balance very carefully right in the middle at times. All three on any given day, come to think of it. So it was with great relief and a bit of amusement that I read this Scientific American article, by Frank McAndrew: The Science of Gossip: Why We Can’t Stop Ourselves.

The excuse: 
SciAM: Like it or not, our inability to forsake gossip and information about other individuals is as much a part of who we are as is our inability to resist doughnuts or sex—and for the same reasons.

SC: Not sure I’d label gossip, doughnuts and sex as being “equally resistant.”

Good point from an evolutionary standpoint:
SciAm: Individuals who violated expectations about sharing resources and meeting responsibilities became frequent targets of gossip and ostracism, which applied pressure on them to become better citizens. These social pressures discouraged free riders and cheaters and encouraged altruists. In such societies, the manipulation of public opinion through gossip, ridicule and ostracism became a key way of keeping potentially dominant group members in check.

SC:  Stay in line or sleep with one eye open, got it.

The benefit:
SciAm: People who were fascinated with the lives of others were simply more successful than those who were not, and it is the genes of those individuals that have come down to us through the ages.

SC:  Thanks, Grandma!

The obvious:
SciAm: Although males are usually more interested in news about other males, females are virtually obsessed with news about other females.

SC: Girls gossip about girls–a lot.

The bottom line:
SciAm: Gossip is part of who we are and an essential part of what makes groups function as well as they do. Perhaps it may become more productive to think of gossip as a social skill rather than as a character flaw, because it is only when we do not do it well that we get into trouble.

SciAm: Successful gossiping is about being a good team player and sharing key information with others in a way that will not be perceived as self-serving and about understanding when to keep your mouth shut.

Did we really need science to confirm this last point?

Cheers!