…lies this tree! I love this tree and, at least what I’m ascribing to it in terms of how it got that way.

The first interesting aspect of this situation is the equal priority both have been given in access to the right-of-way along the road. In most modern cities or suburbs, I can say with near certainty that this tree would be cut down. Why would a city not do what they have done here? Because the tree’s trunk is growing directly below the wire. The tree will certainly converge back on the wire and ensnare it again, requiring perpetual pruning. Plus, if the tree were to fall either towards or away from the road, it could take the wire with it; the tree forms what is almost a ring around the wire. To a provider of infrastructure, both risks not worth sparing the tree.

Another interesting aspect of this situation is how the tree has adapted to its situation. The tree has grown more “bushy” on both sides of the wire, almost joining again at the top. How often it is pruned, I’m not sure, but this tree seems to have essentially become two trees.

Has the wire or the infrastructure adapted to the presence of the tree? Seemingly no, but maybe when installing this line, the pole to support the wire was put near this tree on purpose. Since the pole lifts the wire up to its highest point (it droops in-between poles), it helps the tree to have the wire higher above it; there’s less chance to have the wire end up resting on the tree.

The tree is also likely spared by the fact that this pole looks to only carry telecom cables. I can’t tell whether the thinner wire second from the top is electrical or not–if so, it would *really* surprise me that this tree was allowed to remain as it is; it’s an easy path to ground. My bet is that there is no electricity on this pole.

An interesting reflection of somebody’s values that you don’t see everyday!

Today, I got a glimpse of what the webopticon is really about, besides being my blog. So today, I got an E-mail from my old supervisor at SSI Services. As you may or may not know, I worked on the Knowledge Center project, a system to coordinate emergency responders, when I was there.

Anyway, so today I get an E-mail telling me that the “City of Pittsburgh” (nothing more specific) “noticed” me when I was taking pictures of the water main break last week. They then contacted SSI to “ask what our relationship was”.

The reason that this is so interesting to me is that I never gave my name out–nor did I really talk to anybody at the scene. They either recognized me from my time at SSI when I went to client meetings (the “client” including some of the same emergency responders who were at the water main break), or, more likely, they used Google to look for information on the water main break.

They then likely found my photos on Flickr and noticed themselves, or remembered me being there. Finding my Flickr photos, they got my name, Googled that, found my resume, and then saw that I worked at SSI (phew!). They then must have called SSI to ask what was going on.

What’s also interesting is that my photo of the PEMA/DHS guy at the scene has 10 more views than any other photo of the incident. Was it him who found the photos on Flickr? I’ll never know, but it’s interesting how Google has turned the Internet into a true panopticon (”webopticon”). Viewers can remain anonymous and get a glimpse into my life, to such a level that they can piece together my movements on a given day, and even my past work/jobs. I guess divulging that information is *my* choice, and I’m not trying to explicitly hide, either. There have also been other examples of Google panopticon-ness.

It what seems like a good omen, the world keeps giving me new ways to explain to people why they should care about infrastructure. Today, the addition is a broken Pittsburgh water main. The ~20″ main broke around noon, and sent water running down the street in such quantities that on-lookers said it looked like a river. Video of the water can be seen at a page on KDKA’s website. My favorite shot is when the stairs literally look like a waterfall. That’s a *lot* of water!

After work, I headed over to the scene to see what was going on. There were roughly six or so bystanders that looked like they weren’t there to work–there were also dozens of construction workers, supervisors, reporters, engineers, PWSA people, PEMA/Department of Homeland Security(!) and police. As you can see in the photos below, it made for a pretty “populated” intersection.

One of my favorite exchanges I witnessed was one of the bystanders telling the PWSA guys “thanks”. The guys said “they needed that”, and thanked the bystander back. Maybe another worker “thanks” project, vis-a-viz “The New York Sanitation Department Project” is in order?

When Alex and I went to Millvale this past weekend, we saw a “real gem” of an infrastructure: an *analog* gas pressure logger! Seeing this system still in use made me realize that one of two things is true.

One, the gas distribution system, at least in Pittsburgh, is antiquated. There seems to be no, or very little, central logging or telemetry data collection infrastructure for the gas distribution network. The system would be slow to respond to an abnormality, as people would have to drive around and collect these paper discs to get a full picture of the system and isolate the problem. The electrical grid, on the other hand, seems much more modern and centrally monitored and controlled.

Or, possibility two: infrastructure’s modernization is place-contextual. That is, infrastructure is newer in newer neighborhoods (obvious), but more interestingly, maybe older neighborhood’s infrastructure is not *updated* as newer technology is released. Maybe infrastructure “decays” or ages along with the neighborhood. Pipes would, of course, but maybe above-ground things (control systems, for instance) do the same. If this is true, it seems like an awfully big burden on the system operators, as they would then have to support a multitude of different systems that report data in different ways. But then again, why upgrade a system if you don’t have to?

One really interesting example of this is the cable TV network. In Larimer, a disadvantaged neighborhood in Pittsburgh, the water mains suck. We saw a few leaky ones in our informal walks through the neighborhood. The neighborhood does have, however, a modern (hybrid fiber-coax) cable TV network. Interesting.

Back to the gas, I’m guessing the real reason is the first. Equitable Gas (or Equitable Resources as they now want to be called) invested a lot of capital in fixing the underground gas pipelines in Pittsburgh–I’m guessing they’re just pushing investment of control/telemetry systems off as long as they can. Gotta’ please those investors!

Over a snack at Panera(!), Alex and I were talking about corporate cultures and how companies attract or drive away certain groups of people as both employees and customers. For instance, Pot Belly Sandwich Works in Troy (and other places) has a culture of “funky artist”. Some of the employees are vegan (as I learned through a discussion with them), and most looked like hipsters. How much of this is corporately desired/encouraged, I don’t know.

Panera, on the other hand, has a more diverse workforce–the one we went to in Pittsburgh had two African-Americans, one guy of unknown decent and three white women working there. Then we thought about McDonalds, and what culture they have. According to their annual reports, McDonalds is moving towards more of a “lounge model” in some urban markets. Presumably, this is to grab more of the “coffee house” market. The locations will reportedly have TVs, wireless Internet and nicer (stuffed?) chairs.

McDonalds advertises mainly to urban African-Americans (looking at their ads of young black men playing basketball and saying they’re “loving it” with their quarter pounder with cheese). When Alex and I worked in Larimer and went into the corner store, it was common to see patrons buying bread and cheese and telling their hungry kids that it was dinner. We assumed these were single mothers who were on a limited income. I’ve read that many use McDonalds in much the same way–a primary food source.

We wondered what role the corner store could play in encouraging nutritious choices, but how about McDonalds? As a corporation that, in many ways, forms people’s thinking about food and nutrition, what role do they have? I acknowledge they are serving salads and fruit now, but I think they could do more. A start may be, for instance, reducing serving sizes of fries or soda. Maybe introducing a fruit-juice sweetened drink. Having *fresh* fruit instead of fries, similar to Panera’s replacement of chips with fruit. McDonalds could, similar to the Healthy Black Families initiative in Pittsburgh, make this thrust a cultural thing. Unfortunately, McDonalds either doesn’t realize the power of their cultural impact, or, more likely, chooses the safe, yet profitable path of giving people what sells, regardless of whether it’s slowly killing them.