The Lost symbol

I read “The Lost symbol” written by Dan Brown. Dan Brown is a very good writer and has also published the famous book (and movie) “The Da Vinci Code”. The book is written in an excellent way and has many interesting details. I have occasionally been using the dictionary and have learned a lot of new words.

“I am a masterpiece.

His massive body was shaved and smooth. He lowered his gaze first to his feet, which were tattooed with the scales and talons of a hawk… his powerful chest was emblazoned with the double-headed phoenix… “

Dan Brown, The Lost symbol, page 31

This text is in a chapter where Dan Brown exclusively describe and reflects about “the person who called himself Mal‘akh”.  Who is that man? Dan makes us understand how the person looks on the outside and inside but still it generates more questions than answers. Mal’akh is preparing himself for something. It looks like something huge will take place tonight. Is he a good or a bad guy?

The person seems to be very awed about his body and have self-confidence. He thinks about himself as a “masterpiece”.  Nothing can stop him.

Mal’akh looks like a very important person to the book. The tattoos is described in details and when you read about them you want to know if they will become important in the continuation or if they just tells you about his personality.  The curiosity make you want to read more about him. Who is this guy? What is he going to do?

The tattoos are described like shapes of scales, talons of a hawk, a double-headed phoenix etc. What does they mean? Are the scales describing something he want to remember and will have use of later? Are the talons and the phoenix symbols?

If you read the book you will get answers.

Reflection 2: Are droids taking our jobs?

Reflections of the TED-talk  -  Andrew McAfee: Are droids taking our jobs?

"So, in short, yeah, the droids are coming for our jobs. In the short term, we can stimulate job growth by encouraging entrepreneurship and by investing in infrastructure, because the robots today still aren't very good at fixing bridges. But in the not-too-long-term, I think within the lifetimes of most of the people in this room, we're going to transition into an economy that is very productive but that just doesn't need a lot of human workers, and managing that transition is going to be the greatest challenge that our society faces. " - Andrew McAfee


I believe that robots will help us to be more productive in the future and it will provide companies a good economy as Andrew McAfee says. But I believe, or hope, that we humans will be needed anyway... The technology should be a benefit to us, not a threat to our own jobs.

Otherwise we can reduce our job days. For example in Norway they count their lunch time to their work hours.
Or why not do it like in the old days? One at home taking care of the household and one is working to get money. We must take advantages of developments.

Our children is the future and it speaks a lot of whats best for them. Give them the best opportunities in life. All parents are trying to get as much time as possible to them but the community is  structured on that both should work. The puzzle doesn't fit! If the droids were coming and took a little more responsibility, perhaps we could slow down a bit. Give the children what they want most of all from us - our time.

I would gladly work with R2-D2!

Reflection 1, "Can a city really ban cars from its streets?"

Reflections of the article "Can a city really ban cars from its streets?" written by Jack Stewart published on the BBC 4 February 2014.

When I'm considering the pros and cons, about having a city without private cars, I think of much more benefits.

+

Cheaper transport

Less traffic accidents 

Fresher and cleaner air

Invites you to exercise (such as cycling and walking)

Environmentally friendly

More space to green parks

The structure of the city do not need to be adapted to cars and its roads and car parks.

No roads needed only walking- and bike paths (depending on solutions of public communications)

Safer for children

Everything cant go with the same speed as with cars in the town --> less stress

-

Difficult to get everywhere

Difficult to weekly shopping (to carry everything)

Difficult to move in and out of the city

Takes more time to move from A to B --> becomes stressful if you do not have time

Difficult for stores to get the goods

I like the idea of having a city without cars. We are talking about having eco cars and eco driving  etc, why not take it a step further and have no cars at all? It would be absolutely the best for the environmental! 

But to be able to live in a city without cars, I would have very high demands on the public communications. I prefer the subway instead of buses and trains. If the city had a good subway it just need walk and bike paths. This paths/small roads must of course also be available to relevant cars for example necessary ambulances, goods to shops, when a family moves out or in. 

The human being is comfortable. Everything must be close to or at a comfortable distance.  More local shops and schools. It will feel a bit like going back in time. 

I think it is unclear air in cities and I prefer country living. If a city ban cars from its streets I think that the air would be healthier. More green space and playgrounds for the children. Less stress without fast cars and big roads. Sounds like a healthy and safer town! Maybe I would consider staying more centrally.

Hamburg´s project is interesting. To build up the structure of the city so it invites people to navigate without cars sounds like a good plan. It is good for the inhabitants. And I think it will benefit the tourism in the city!