The Doomsday Clock
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cac8f/cac8f0025a8ddd90fcc689d9a5a6fdcbb773bbca" alt=""
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock conveys how close humanity is to catastrophic destruction--the figurative midnight--and monitors the means humankind could use to obliterate itself. First and foremost, these include nuclear weapons, but they also encompass climate-changing technologies and new developments in the life sciences and nanotechnology that could inflict irrevocable harm.
Interesting -- you know what this is? It's a risk assessment. In my first book I defined risk as the probability of suffering harm or loss. The Doomsday Clock supposedly displays how close we are to world-ending catastrophe.
I find two aspects of the clock appealing.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c3b7d/c3b7d21c2cb295cef64c2079becd0624076e0639" alt=""
First, as depicted by Information Aesthetics, the clock rapidly and clearly communicates its message. If you see fewer and fewer minutes until midnight, you sense something bad is about to happen. It's language-neutral and concise.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/19949/199490f1a892b95dced7e5fa80c662c1592606e9" alt=""
Second, the act of moving the hands and then tracking hand position over time provides a sense of risk trending. As depicted by Wikipedia above, you can get a historical reading of risk by watching the number of minutes to midnight rise and fall. The interval between the hand position changes is also significant.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eacec/eacec433866b11ed000c37ed9f7f6d336022a523" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ec6c5/ec6c506c0f946031d0d2624bbc139cd9aa8456b5" alt=""
From this point forward, the hands have moved back and forth as the Bulletin members and, more recently, outside parties have haggled about the position of the hands. I have a feeling these meetings would drive me crazy. It's a collection of people with opinions arguing about the location of hands on a clock created originally for artistic value. Still, as noted in my two "appealing" points, I think we can learn some lessons from the Doomsday Clock regarding the ability to quickly and powerfully communicate risk to others.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fd88c/fd88c60ac7acebca21ce93a2ffa41e6c9cd24b6c" alt=""
First, the ACLU chose a digital clock. I don't know about you, but for me a digital clock doesn't convey an amount of time as visually as an analog clock. It's like a speedometer; seeing it pegged to the right is more powerful than reading "101 MPH" or similar. Second, as Wired magazine astutely asked how do we know when we're there? It's tough to ignore Armageddon; it's easy to ignore a "surveillance state." Third, the ACLU painted itself into the same corner as the Bulletin did when it chose to set its initial time so close to midnight. What's the ACLU going to do with the clock when remote mind-reading is in use?
Comments
I think the possibility of moving to seconds or nano-seconds in order to still slowly creep up goes a bit beyond the point of the doomsday clock.
http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/The_Numbers
or better yet, The Venture Bros.
http://www.tv.com/the-venture-brothers/20-years-to-midnight/episode/810542/summary.html
So my visual interpretation says we have 23 hours and 54 minutes before surveillance society; which feels like a good long time.
It also looks a bit brain-dead, since the ":" activity bug is blinking, but the time doesn't move.