Seen, Heard, Said
Things I’ve seen, heard, or was told by someone. Item in this category usually originate from the Internet.
Outback Backout
From Harpers.org:
…The following correction was printed last year in the Australian, a daily newspaper published in Sydney….
A story headlined “Syria seeks our help to woo U.S.” in Saturday’s Weekend Australian misquoted National Party senator Sandy Macdonald. The quote stated, “Syria is a country that has been a bastard state for nearly forty years,” but should have read, “Syria is a country that has been a Baathist state for nearly forty years.”
The Australian regrets any embarrassment caused by the error.
Advantages of ADD
The advantages of ADD in a high tech world
It seems to me ADD and the technology industry is a natural fit. The constant change of the high tech world can be stressful and troubling for some people but it’s often stimulating and energizing for the ADDer. A great source of Dopamine hits. Although, there are no specific statistics a number of other ADD experts I’ve talked to agree with my observation.
10 advantages of having ADD in a high tech career:
- The Ability to Hyperfocus.
- Rapid Fire Mind.
- Multitasking at Will.
- High Energy Level.
- Highly Creative.
- Quick Learner.
- Stimulus Seeking Brain.
- Constantly Scanning your Environment.
- Great in a Crisis.
- Risk Taker.
Explanations are given over at http://adultaddstrengths.com/2006/02/09/top-10-advantages-of-add-in-a-high-tech-career/
Link via Lifehacker
[tags]ADD, ADHD, technology[/tags]
USACM Policy Recommendations on Digital Rights Management
This is a good start on creating guidelines for DRM…not that I’m in favor of DRM. But I realize that it is here to stay, so I might as well help shape it some how. I think the biggest issue that faces DRM is how it’s implemented. The ultimate case in point being Sony’s hell of a clusterfuck with their music CDs.
From Freedom to Tinker:
USACM (United States Association for Computing Machinery) Policy Recommendations on Digital Rights Management
BACKGROUND:
New technologies have remade the consumer entertainment landscape, allowing creative content – such as movies, television, and radio programming – to be delivered in digital form. Because exact copies of digital
content can be widely and quickly distributed, some content distributors are employing technical protection systems to manage consumer uses of copyrighted content, often characterized as “digital rights management (DRM)” technology. DRM systems are intended to enable distributors to manage consumer uses of content. In theory, this may prevent the making and distribution of infringing copies of digital works. However, use of these technologies has created controversy, especially as regards issues of “fair use” and public interest. In some cases, DRM technologies have been found to undermine consumers’ rights, infringe customer privacy, and damage the security of consumers’ computers. One notable example was the software distributed with compact discs in 2005 by Sony BMG. Sony subsequently withdrew the product, which had created security and privacy vulnerabilities for consumers’ computers, because of resulting public criticism and legal action.
The marketplace should determine the success or failure of DRM technologies but, increasingly, content distributors are turning to legislatures or the courts to erect new legal mandates to replace long-standing copyright regimes. DRM systems should be mechanisms for reinforcing existing legal constraints on behavior, not as mechanisms for creating new legal constraints. Striking a balance among consumers’ rights, public interest, and protection of valid copyright interests is no simple task for technologists or policymakers. For this reason, USACM has developed the following recommendations on this important issue.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Competition: Public policy should enable a variety of DRM approaches and systems to emerge, should allow and facilitate competition among them, and should encourage interoperability among them. No proprietary DRM technology should be mandated for use in any medium.
Copyright Balance: Because lawful use (including fair use) of copyrighted works is in the public’s best interest, a person wishing to make lawful use of copyrighted material should not be prevented from doing so. As such, DRM systems should be mechanisms for reinforcing existing legal constraints on behavior (arising from copyright law or by reasonable contract), not as mechanisms for creating new legal constraints. Appropriate technical and/or legal safeguards should be in place to preserve lawful uses in cases where DRM systems cannot distinguish lawful uses from infringing uses.
Consumer Protection: DRM should not be used to interfere with the rights of consumers. Neither should DRM technologies interfere with any technology or use of consumer systems that are unrelated to the copyrighted items being managed. Policymakers should actively monitor actual use of DRM and amend policies as necessary to protect these rights and interests.
Privacy and Consent: Public policy should ensure that DRM systems may collect, store, and redistribute private information about users only to the extent required for their proper operation, that they follow fair information practices, and that they are subject to informed consent by users.
Research and Public Discourse: DRM systems and policies should not interfere with legitimate research, with discourse about research results, or with other matters of public concern. Laws and regulations concerning DRM should contain explicit provisions to protect this principle.
Targeted Policies: Public policies meant to reinforce copyright should be limited to applications where copyright interests are actually at stake. Laws and regulations concerning DRM should have limited scope, applying only where there is a realistic risk of copyright infringement.
Free 16MB ThumbDrive
Threadwatch reports, “Fill out a short form and Microsoft will give you a free 16MB USB drive loaded with information on Windows licensing.”
Grab ’em while they’re hot!
An Open Letter To America Online
I’ve railed against AOL for sometime now, but this takes the cake. And no, this is not that hoax letter that has been circulating the Internet for the last 10 years that everyone, you, and your grandma have all recieved saying that AOL is going to start charging for AOL Instant Messenger. This one is quite real, my friends. Via Chris Pirillo over at Lockergnome:
From: all@dearaol.com
To: postmaster@aol.com
Date: Tue Feb 28 13:00:00 EST 2006
Subject: An Open Letter To America Online
We wish to express our serious concern with AOL’s adoption of Goodmail’s CertifiedEmail, which is a threat to the free and open Internet.
This system would create a two-tiered Internet in which affluent mass emailers could pay AOL a fee that amounts to an “email tax” for every email sent, in return for a guarantee that such messages would bypass spam filters and go directly to AOL members’ inboxes. Those who did not pay the “email tax” would increasingly be left behind with unreliable service. Your customers expect that your first obligation is to deliver all of their wanted mail, and this plan is a step away from that obligation.
AOL’s “email tax” is the first step down a slippery slope that will harm the Internet itself. The Internet is a revolutionary force for free speech, civic organizing, and economic innovation precisely because it is open and accessible to all Internet users equally. On a free and open Internet, small ideas can become big ideas overnight. As Internet advocacy groups, charities, non-profits, businesses, civic organizing groups, and email experts, we ask you to reconsider your pay-to-send proposal and to keep the Internet free.
A pay-to-send system won’t help the fight against spam – in fact, this plan assumes that spam will continue and that mass mailers will be willing to pay to have their emails bypass spam filters. And non-paying spammers will not reduce the amount of mail they throw at your filters simply because others pay to evade them.
Perversely, the new two-tiered system AOL proposes would actually reward AOL financially for failing to maintain its email service. The chief advantage of paying to send CertifiedEmail is that it can bypass AOL’s spam filters. Non-paying customers are being asked to trust that after paid mail goes into effect, AOL will properly maintain its spam filters so only unwanted mail gets thrown away.
But the economic incentives point the other way: The moment AOL switches to a two-tiered Internet where giant emailers pay for preferential service, AOL will face a simple business choice: spend money to keep regular spam filters up-to-date, or make money by neglecting their spam filters and pushing more senders to pay for guaranteed delivery. Poor delivery of mail turns from being a problem that AOL has every incentive to fix to something that could actually make them money if the company ignores it.
The bottom-line is that charging an “email tax” actually gives AOL a financial incentive to degrade email for non-paying senders. This would disrupt the communications of millions who cannot afford to pay your fees-including the non-profits, civic organizations, charities, small businesses, and community mailing lists that have arisen for every topic under the sun and that make email so vital to your subscribers.
And what if other Internet service providers retaliate and start demanding their own ransoms to accept mail from your millions of users? Your company works hard to simplify the Internet. Don’t start a surcharge war that will complicate it with tiered services and dozens of middleman fees for every simple act of communication.
We have always been happy working together with you to fight spam and phishing. We have a common enemy in spammers. We are happy to work together to develop open approaches that attack the problem of spam and phishing. But a pay-to-send “certified” system does not help to fight spam. It only serves to make the Internet less free for everyone. We stand together in asking you to reconsider your decision to use CertifiedEmail.
Respectfully,
All In The Presentation
The success of many things depends on one simple thing: How you present it.
Example #1:
Food. How appealing food is often depends directly on how it is presented. There was a famous study done some time ago. The researchers colored the foods different colors people would refuse to eat it, even though it was perfectly good.
Example #2:
From Okdork.com:
“Hi I am Noah what’s your name”
“Oh Hey I am Jennifer, are you from around here?”
“Yea, I grew up in the Bay Area”
“really, where?”
“Oh in cupertino”
“Nice, are you renting or do you have roommates”
“yea 3 of us live in a house”
“very cool, blah blah blah”
and the conversation continues and I score! Sounds like a great thing. What if I told you those 2 other roommates are my parents? Different story huh? Product positioning is how you explain the story to the users and the people you want using your product.
Example #3:
Mapping My Personality Visability
This is actually pretty cool. I’ve picked 6 words that I think best describe me. Now you go and pick 5 or 6 words that you think best describe me:
http://kevan.org/johari?name=AndrewFerguson
I’ve also done the same by picking the best 5 words that describe my failings. Now you go and pick 5 or 6 words that you think best describe my failings:
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=AndrewFerguson
The former is called a Johari Window and the latter is called a Nohari Window.
Via Audreyln
Twelve Ways To Mark Up A Book
Twelve tips on how to mark a book while reading. Posting mostly so I don’t forget, but also because it’s worth sharing.
From Open Loops:
What Not To Do
- Don’t use a highlighter – Quality marking isn’t done with a fat-tipped highlighter. You can’t write, which is an important part of marking the text, with a large marker. Get yourself some fine point colored pens to do the job.
- Don’t mark large volumes of text – You want important points to stand out. Although we all know that everything can’t be important, we often highlight all of the text on the page. You want to find the 20% of the text that is important (remember Pareto?) and mark that.
- Don’t take the time to mark up items that you read on a daily basis – (e.g., magazines, newspapers), unimportant or irrelevant items.
- Don’t mark the obvious – Don’t waste time marking up things that are already in your knowledge-base or skill set. If you already know it, you don’t need to mark it.
What To Do
- Mark the text with a pencil, pen, or, even better, colored fine-tipped pens – Remember, you are not highlighting, you are writing.
- Know your preferences – Some of you have an aversion to mark directly in the text. Books are precious things to many people and they want to protect them from damage and even the wear and tear of everyday use. If this describes you, grab some Post-It brand notes and do your marking and writing on them. This also gives you the advantage to move and reorganize them should you see fit. As for me, I like to mark directly on the page. I find that my books become more valuable to me when I add my contributions to the information that they contain.
- Underline the topic sentence in a passage – Remember, each paragraph has one topic sentence. The rest is supporting information and examples. Identify the topic sentence to find it easier.
- Use codes – Flag text with codes (e.g., Question marks to indicate disagreement, Exclamation marks to note agreement or to flag a strong statement, triangles to indicate a change in thinking, or a star for the topic sentence).
- Write the passage topic in the margin as a reminder – Just a word or two.
- Write questions in the margin – When you don’t understand something or when you don’t understand the author’s thought process on a particular topic, write the question in the margin as a reminder to settle the question.
- Circle new and unfamiliar words – Look them up as soon as possible.
- Add your or other author’s perspectives in the margins – Other authors have surely written on the same subject. What do they say? Do they agree with this author? If not, what do they say. Add these ideas in the margins.
- Add cross-reference notes to other works on the same topic – Use the author’s name and a shortened version of the other book’s title.
- Add structure to a narrative text – Use 1, 2, 3, 4…or an outline format I. A. B. C. 1, 2, 3, a, b, c…to add a structure that you understand.
- Draw arrows to related ideas – Or unrelated ideas…
- Summarize – Add your own summary after the last paragraph. That simple exercise will crystalize your thinking on the topic. If you can’t write it, you don’t understand it.
Benford’s Law
There is been some interesting discusion of Benford’s Law in the last few weeks, first on the Internet, then in an episode of Numb3rs, then with my mom and grandma, and now back on the Internet again.
From Wikipedia:
From en.wikipedia.org:
Benford’s Law…states that in lists of numbers from many real-life sources of data, the leading digit 1 occurs much more often than the others (namely about 30% of the time). Furthermore, the larger the digit, the less likely it is to occur as the leading digit of a number. This applies to figures related to the natural world or of social significance; be it numbers taken from electricity bills, newspaper articles, street addresses, stock prices, population numbers, death rates, areas or lengths of rivers, physical and mathematical constants, and processes described by power laws (which are very common in nature).
One should occur 30.1% of the time, 2: 17.6%, and so on as the following list shows:
- 30.1 %
- 17.6 %
- 12.5 %
- 9.7 %
- 7.9 %
- 6.7 %
- 5.8 %
- 5.1 %
- 4.6 %
Even more interesting, at least in my mind, is that Benford’s Law is easily formulated:
Logb(n + 1) – Logbn; where n is the number whose probability you are trying to determine and b is the base of the counting system (i.e. Base 10 for most purposes, Base 2 for binary, Base 16 for hexidecimal, etc).
There are many intersting things you can do with Benford’s Law, such as catching cheaters. Apparently, the IRS uses Benford’s Law as a preliminary check of your tax returns.