PAPER NOTE
With one picture, I see why this author was going on and on about sound.  It still needs some work to develop the conceptual consequences for architecture, but at least now there is a reason to include it in the conference.  See if you can beat up the author to make it more legible.


ABSTRACT NOTE
This paper seems to have little content and lots of attitude. I am not a theorist and I have a very low tolerance for academic jargon and garbled syntax.  So this paper sets off all my alarm bells. There is no evidence that the author actually has experience with computers in architecture.