Already has. This is called “method acting”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_acting

What I wanted to add, Ross, is that I’ve known you for over 10 years and have always admired your writing talents but nonetheless I was most impressed by your ability to write meaningful summaries of the talks in real time and post them before the start of the next session. Truly amazing notetaking skills!

I tremendously enjoyed the workshop and the chances to meet and interact with interesting people.

In your summary of my talk you ask about the difference between safety and security in my example of a pigeon flying into an aircraft engine (safety issue) verus being thrown intentionally into the engine (a security issue). From an engine design point of view, there may be little difference - the engine may need to be made more resilient to cope with such events. However, by understanding the human behavior that might lead a person to throw a pigeon at an aircraft intentionally, we may end up with additional security solutions (such as strengthening the airport perimter fence) to prevent the intentional attack. I think exploring this subtle distinction between intention and accident allows us to better analyse our problem space, and in turn our solution space…

Congratulations on a terrific event. I enjoyed it immensely, and look forward to phase two. It was very stimulating, on a variety of levels. Thanks also for live-blogging the event.

I have a couple of corrections to your summary of my presentation. First, I said that we pay too much attention to the lyrics, and not enough to the music and the dance. Second, the title of my most recent book is ‘The Most Dangerous Animal: Human Nature and the Origins of War.’

David