Visual SMUT

Thoughts on SMUT

I left the Stafford Main in Downtown Bryan on Thursday night disappointed. Not because I was disappointed in my experience, but because I was disappointed that my experience had to end. Somewhere between the slam poetry, and the pints of beer, and the talk about robots seeking truth, and the conversations with friends, and the talk about uploading your brain, we all felt connected around a single thought: ideas change everything. For most of us we learn about the world around us through the lens of whatever media we use to get our information. However, what the Subversive Manifesto for Underground Technology does is bring the world of ideas to us unfiltered. It also allows for a two way conversation. In stead of just consuming news and information, we can engage with questions and comments.

It was fitting then that SMUT began simply with spoken words by Buck Ley Hogue, who slammed some poetry to begin the evening. Then Phil Wheat, who works for Microsoft in Austin, took the stage and asked whether or not we actually own our DNA. Interestingly enough, the talk moved towards the idea of privacy in our society. Then after more spoken word from Buck, Dylan Shell, a professor at Texas A&M University, took the stage and talked about robots and the search for truth. An interesting question that was raise during Shell’s talk was whether or not we should ban prostitute robots that look like 10 year olds? After more poetry from Buck, Wheat took the stage again to talk about green technology. During his talk Wheat ask the question of if we shine a light on a road, but no one's on it, does it exist? The answer was that philosophically, maybe no, but it sure surges the power grid. The night ended with a powerful poem by Buck.

For me SMUT was refreshing. Much of my time on the blogosphere and in social media is spent in ideological debate and discussion. Create and destroy. Construct arguments for my positions, and deconstruct the arguments of others. However, during SMUT everyone who was tweeting the event was more interesting in share the ideas, and less in deconstructing the ideas that they disagreed with. While I realize that the deconstruction of ideas is not a bad thing and that healthy debate creates better ideas, it was refreshing to hear those ideas without preconceived notions of who is right and wrong. But that was just my view, and you would have a different one if you experience SMUT. And that’s kind of the point.