Multitasking

Interesting quote about multi-tasking and the study of it from the article linked below. The "Nass" referred to in the quote is Clifford I. Nass, professor of psychology at Stanford.

"One of the deepest questions in this field," Nass says, "is whether media multitasking is driven by a desire for new information or by an avoidance of existing information. Are people in these settings multitasking because the other media are alluring—that is, they're really dying to play Freecell or read Facebook or shop on eBay—or is it just an aversion to the task at hand?"

When Nass was a high-school student, decades ago, his parents were fond of an old quotation from Sir Joshua Reynolds: "There is no expedient to which man will not resort to avoid the real labor of thinking." That is the conundrum that has animated much of his career.

"I don't think that law students in classrooms are sitting there thinking, Boy, I'd rather play Freecell than learn the law," Nass says. "I don't think that's the case. What happens is that there's a moment that comes when you say, Boy, I can do something really easy, or I can do something really hard."

You know, I got made fun of like this in Kindergarten too!

[Me]: on the diploma: middle name written out or middle initial?
[McCabester]: what is it?
[Me]: my middle name?
[McCabester]: yes
[Me]: [Insert Middle Name Here]
[McCabester]: really!!
are you really telling me your middle name? or are you making it up

Insect Brutality?

You would think that the age of discrimination was at an end. Unfortunately, this video obviously proves that wrong. This video is disgusting, vile, and offensive to insect lovers everywhere.

Just kidding. Actually the video below is of a mosquito getting show down by the laser. Yes, a frickin' laser. Apparently one of the devices shown off at the 2010 TED Conference where awesome TED Talks happen is a laser that can track and shoot down mosquitos with the hopes of keeping mosquito populations under control to reduce the number of deaths due to malaria. That's awesome. But really, if this was a video of a cute little dog getting shot down by a laser everyone would be freaking out. Just putting that out there.



Via Gizmodo

EDIT: Some more on the mosquito hunting laser

P.S. Also, since Malcolm Gladwell's TED Talk (linked above) is just so cool, I'm just gonna embed it down here too for your viewing pleasure.

If she wants to run for President, I hope she comes up with better phrases than

“How’s that hopey-changey thing workin’ out for you?” - Sarah Palin

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/us/politics/09palin.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

$20 to give the gift of sight

So I was on the subway today and saw a blind man with a seeing-eye dog. I'm sure everyone thinks this all the time, but when I saw him I couldn't help but think (again) "damn, that must suck to not be able to see."

I have pretty bad vision in both my eyes, so while I may not be blind, I know what it's like to have terrible and basically unusable vision. Without my glasses or contacts I can basically see my way to the bathroom at night and back--that's it. Any deviations from that path will either lead to a 1) very scared me or 2) very injured me.

In that light it's kind of nuts to think about all those people in 3rd world countries who have vision like mine; who basically can't see on a day to day basis. Unlike that man on the subway, those living with impaired vision in developing nations have the possibility of regaining their sight, but they just don't have the monetary means.

So I was pretty astounded when I found out about Adspecs, which are essentially $20 glasses. Not only do the glasses cost only $20, but they also remove the need to have a professional optometrist examine you, a large added cost to traditional glasses.

Adspecs are oil-filled glasses whose lenses are adjustable by a dial on the side. The oil fills the space in-between the membrane of the lenses allowing the lens to expand or contract with it, adjusting the magnification. They're not pretty, but they get the job done. The end goal of the developer is to have them sell for $1 each.

That's awesome, and I hope people never have to see like I do without my glasses again.

Whoa, I never noticed, but so true

So apparently, news reports basically follow the same formula over and over again, something I guess I always knew deep down inside but never really realized. Anyway, some dude made some neat video showing us all how to be ace journalists.



From my friend "Sauce," who just started a new blog but has no idea that I'm reading it yet (creepy, I know, but I'll give her a heads up once I stop copy-catting her posts)

Have you ever tried to use a handsfree thing in the car?

We have a bluetooth headset at home, but I refuse to set it up for my mom. Why? Because it would probably increase her likelihood of getting into an accident with all that fiddling and stuff. It's definitely the talking, not the cell phone.

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/study-finds-that-reduced-phone-use-does-not-cut-crashes/

Lay Waste!?

okay, question of the day: how much do you jeopardize a friendship over a disagreement? Like one of those disagreements that you actually care about and one which you feel that the other side is being completely irrational on? How much risk do you take on before backing out, being wary of the fact that your friendship might be permanently damaged the next day?

I feel like that's a question that I have not found the answer to, even remotely at all. It's not like I want to lay waste to any friendships I have, but also at the same time I don't know where the boundary lies for the "permanent damage zone." Because after all, if your preferences state that you value what you believe in, and you value the friendship, but you value your friendship more than what you believe in, you should stand your ground until just before the point of reaching the "permanent damage zone," right?

Or should you never even remotely get close to that line? I mean after all chances are if both positions are so firmly engrained in something there's a very slim chance something will change. Should you just leave it be without a fight?

I wish I knew the answer to that question. And hell everyone else probably does, but you know what, I'm just a pretty big fuck-up in the end.

EDIT: At the request of my friend I'm going to put some sort of study on friendship/make this post intellectually intelligent somehow. So with that I would like to grace you with this link which I don't think I've read, w00t:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/health/21well.html

Winners want the ball

I like basketball, but I can't play. I don't know why. I played in prep school and I liked being on the team, but I didn't want the ball and the coach said, "Jed, winners always want the ball." I said, "Coach, winners are also better then I am." He said, "Son, to be a winner, you've got to think like a winner." I said, "Coach, to be a winner, you've also got to be better than I am." Anyway, he was right. Winners want the ball.

- Jed Bartlett, The West Wing

Unfortunately I don't think the excuse "Boys will be Boys" can save us from this one

It's a short post, so I'll just link to it: http://www.predictablyirrational.com/?p=704

Yaaaay to teachers!!!

You know, one day I hope that I'll retire and be able to teach. Granted I had great, decently behaved classmates (aside from that incident with Mrs. Sutton and Mr. Barry, oops!), but in high school my teachers always looked so content in the classroom. They shape lives, educate, AND entertain all in a good day's work.

With that being said I'm glad that Gallup found teachers to be the happiest in their well-being index. What's interesting is that they barely beat out "business owner." I would've thought that business owners would be lower down the list, due to all the stresses, hard work, and hours needed to be one. Plus the job security--don't most small businesses fail? Regardless it's good to see them at the top along with teachers.

Physics

http://xkcd.com/669/

Uh-oh, Big Doo-Doo

So Google paid Twitter for the ability to search through tweets. In return Microsoft paid Twitter and Facebook for access to search through their content. Why's this post entitled uh-oh, big doo-doo? Because, if you follow the logic of this post from Gizmodo, if Facebook and Twitter are asking for money to search their content, why shouldn't everyone else? This would include newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post, and I'm sure others as well in the future.

Are we going to have to search with ten different engines depending on what we're looking for in the future? Who knows.

Loved this Article

http://gizmodo.com/5403322/racing-on-carbon-fiber-legs-how-abled-should-we-be

It's part of a series Gizmodo ran called "This Cyborg Life," a series which explored enhancements to the human body. The author, Aimee Mullins, was amputated below the knee before she was a year old. Despite a doctor saying she'd never walk, at the age of 19 she set world records in the 100-meter dash and long jump.

I loved her commentary on being "disabled" and how people view athletes who have undergone various "enhancements," and what actually is an "enhancement."

Hopefully you'll enjoy her essay as much as I did. The Aimee wrote two other articles for the series, which I enjoyed as well, that can be found here:

http://gizmodo.com/5404227/normal-was-never-cool-inception-of-perception

http://gizmodo.com/5401408/is-choosing-a-prosthesis-so-different-than-picking-a-pair-of-glasses

A testament to our very own irrationalities

Cellphones: we all have them. Have you ever thought about the ridiculous prices that cell phone companies force us to pay? My family pays $80-90 a month for like 1000 minutes and 3 lines or something like that, plus the $10 a month extra that my brother and I add on for only 250 measly text messages each. You know how frequently people text nowadays!? 250 really gets you nowhere, and text messages are essentially costless to a carrier!

Anyway, I digress. The NYTimes recently ran an article on cell phone pricing, a topic which even confuses economists. After all, most businesses want to encourage higher usage of their services by offering lower rates for increased usage, a principle cell phone companies diverge on when they charge huge fees for overage.

I found the psychological effects on consumers due to the pricing models really interesting, though. As the article states, "those high charges for going over your allotted minutes, for example, are designed to cause you enough pain that you will switch to a plan with a higher regular fee." That's actually exactly what happened with my mom, as we went crazily over one month (to the tune of around $200) due to completely unforeseen circumstances, and my mom's upped our plan ever since by $30. We never come close to using all of our minutes.

Some other highlights that I really enjoyed from the article:

• "When companies introduce certain discounts — like Sprint's recent offer of free calling to any mobile number — the effect is that customers often switch to more expensive plans."
• "Americans spend more money each month on their wireless bills than people in any other country." (I would just like to add that our cell phone capabilities are also way behind many other developing nations' like Japan)
• Cingular's introduction of Rollover minutes actually ended up encouraging people to buy larger plans. "It turned out that people were happy to buy extra minutes if they knew they could keep them, rather than having them expire."
• Since people have been texting more and talking less, "revenue from voice plans has fallen 31 percent since peaking in 2003. To fill that hole, the carriers raised the price of a text message from 10 cents to 15 cents, and later to 20 cents. These fees provided nice cash, but as with the voice charges, the main purpose was to persuade customers to subscribe to text-message plans" (they totally got me on that one, which I'm still pretty bitter about)
• And then there's this whole thing on the pricing of the iPhone and how consumers essentially screwed themselves (well, just a little) on it which is also pretty interesting. I'll let you read the article for that part.

I loff it

http://brownsharpie.courtneygibbons.org/?p=1156

Yay for Happy Asians!!!!!!!!!!!!

Continuing with all that happiness hub-bub, this article from Economix reports on a Gallup survey which says that Asians are the happiest people of them all!

Please read here: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/poor-people-more-likely-to-have-experienced-depression/

The Broadband Gap between us and other countries

These posts have been sitting in my inbox for a while and I've been planning to summary what the four of them say, but it's been a while since I've read them and now I've just gotten lazy so I'll just post them up. If you're interested in the internet and the speeds your ISPs offer the articles might be worth taking a look. The two that I enjoyed the most were about the difference in cost between US broadband and other develop nations', which are the first two links.

World's Fastest Broadband at $20 per Home

The Broadband Gap: Why is Theirs Cheaper?

The Broadband Gap: Why is Theirs Faster?

The Broadband Gap: Why do They have more Fiber?

Quick Update!

Over the summer NYTimes.com heavily advertising their new "global edition" that they publish with the International Herald Tribune. They were actually pretty obnoxious about it, so much so that every time you'd go to the regular version a bar would pop up asking if you wanted to switch over. So me, the wish-I-was-worldly-but-really-am-not sort of person I am decided to switch over so every time I visited I'd all sorts of international news to keep me well versed in worldly issues. Oh, that and the stupid bar that kept popping up just got annoying and I just wanted it to stop appearing.

Too bad I'm actually quite unworldly. Aaaaand as a result I've barely read NYTimes.com since.

I just switched back after realizing why the site has been so uninteresting to me recently, but man is that a case of advertising gone wrong.

German dates

"It's 9-9-9 today. Everyone's excited, except apparently the Germans. According to translators, they just keep saying 'No-No-No.' "