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