TED Community » Steve Bruno

More About Me

I'm passionate about

Family, Justice, Faith, Technology, Truth, Trust, Sincerity, Honesty, Transparency, Design, Arts, Respect

An idea worth spreading

Put others before yourself.

My TED Story

A good friend of mine first introduced me to TED about a year ago. I have been enjoying the talks and discussions ever since. I love science, technology, and design, so TED is a great fit.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +5.50 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• +1

  A reply on Conversation: An online platform for sharing manners

  Apr 4 2012: Creating a responsive website is a good route to go for flexibility. Although to be honest, I have not come across a whole lot of websites that have really created a great mobile experience using this method. It's definitely possible, but I find most designers, simply remove some columns as the site width shrinks, forcing the user to scroll through more columns. To really do it properly, you would want to change the structure and how the information is presented to the mobile user.
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: An online platform for sharing manners

  Apr 2 2012: I agree that this is an excellent idea and definitely can see the potential in it.
  
  I am sure your mockups are still very preliminary, but from a usability perspective I would recommend moving the sign up/login links to the top right of the site, as that is a more standard location.
  
  Do you have any plans to provide mobile access to this database? Especially for the traveling business person, I think having a quick mobile site/app will play an important part to it's success.
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: What is the future of libraries?

  Sep 14 2011: Definitely an interesting topic. In the city where I live (Toronto), there have been discussions on funding cuts to libraries in past months.
  
  I think for the public library system to stay alive, they need to focus on their strength of in-person interactions, and also get on board heavily with the digital world (ie. allowing you to "take out" ebooks, and provide other free subscription-based services).
• +1

  A reply on Conversation: Abortion

  Jul 8 2011: To say that "All the laws in our society are customized to human selfish motives" is a bit simplistic in my view. However, you have a completely valid argument regarding abortion Kunal. Even though your comment is far from politically correct, I believe you hit this issue right on the head. The issue is about human value. There are those that believe it is intrinsic, while others believe it is simply relative, and determined by others.

• A comment on Conversation: Will robots one day cross the line into humanity?

  Jul 5 2011: This question rests on two premises:
  
  A) Humans are essentially machines, 100% predictable in every way
  B) Humans contain a self-consciousness and freewill that somehow exists outside of the physical/chemical world
  
  If you belief A then theoretically this could be possible. If however you believe B, than machines will never be able to have self-awareness and freewill, they will only be able to mimic it.
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Is open-source governance a viable model?

  Jul 5 2011: Keep in mind that even open source initiatives (ie, wikipedia, firefox) have governing bodies that regulate who contributes and provide vision to the movement, otherwise there would be total chaos.
  
  I do agree that with the tools we have today, there can be much greater interaction between the government and the average person.
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Abortion

  Jul 5 2011: Is it fair to summarize your moral stance as this: "The value of a human life is determined by what/how he/she can contribute to society"?
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Our modern societies still need feminism

  Jul 5 2011: I agree with much that has been said here. Feminism has brought about needed change and awareness to many injustices in our world. I am very encouraged when I now see that in many countries women are being liberated from their opressors.
  
  I think it is very important to note however that men are not the enemy here. It is an incorrect idealogy, and in some cases religion twisted for personal gain that is the problem. Along these lines, I believe that feminism was a byproduct of men who abused their God given responsibilities to protect and love selflessly. I think it can be easy to only focus on part of the issue with this topic, and it can become unbalanced. I would like to see more men act with integrity, honesty, and selflessness.
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: What would replace current religions if all religions were banned world-wide?

  Jul 5 2011: I find it very sad that there is a vocal portion of community members on TED that have taken it upon themselves to try to rid the world of faith in God.

• A reply on Conversation: Creationism. Why? and thoughts..

  Jul 2 2011: Part 4:
  
  Here is another example illustrate the point that this is indeed a valid option to pursue. Lets consider the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence (SETI) project. It is believed that if we can detect a non-random, non-repeating radio signal, that this is evidence of extra terrestrial intelligence. If they were to receive a signal, say in the form of a Fibonacci series, would they not conclude that this is overwhelming evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence? Would not the bulk of the scientific community agree with their conclusions?
  
  If my prediction is correct, I am inclined to wonder why they would so easily accept this conclusion. How many hours and resources would they spend to investigate the possibility that this signal had emerged from the background of the universe via a process that is yet unknown? Would they argue that this is only our "anthropic" perspective?
  
  Is not the DNA molecule an example of a non-random, non-repeating sequence? Has it not been called the "language of life?" Why should we consider this any different than a non-random, non-repeating signal from space?
  
  TO conclude, I agree I have no "right" to conclude that the source "must" be an intelligent agent. If you read my previous statements again,you will see that I never said or implied this. Seeing that my philosophical presuppositions do not rule out the possibility of an intelligent agent, do I not have a "right" to at least pursue this as an option? Especially in the light that at this point in time we have not actually observed, nor even clearly defined a model of how life could have spontaneously arose in the early earth.