![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
googlechrome
Sep. 2nd, 2008 10:54 pmGoogle's new web browser is supposed to go open public beta tomorrow (I've read reports from some people already using it).
But what I'm really impressed by is this illustrated advertexplanation; in addition to explaining the project which it does very well of course, it may just be the fastest way to inform an average person about fairly advanced computing concepts and coding practices. (Don't even bother saying that nothing new has been developed in CS since the 70s; yes, it's true, but back then they weren't "practices" - it's really taken a while.)
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
It's a real step up from one illustrated computer book I looked at which had, I kid you not, a figure comparing a "real tree" (with totally generic arboreal drawing) with a "binary tree" (box/line representation of nodes/edges), with absolutely no explanation of what the hell a binary tree was good for!
Carnegie Mellon uses the "Cartoon Guide to Statistics" as a required text in its intro courses. I have myself read the "Cartoon Guide to Biology" as a total newbie and can very safely say I learned a lot more in the hour or so I spent doing so, than in any hour taking a biology course. These have the bonus over the google cartoon of copious citations making them even more valuable. (Though it's understandable since the google cartoon is primarily an advert.)
As far as learning-per-novice's-second goes, cartoons are the way to go as long as they are done with care and expertise. Scott McCloud earned his undoubtedly fat paycheck from Google. I wonder how long it took him to pull this thing together.
But what I'm really impressed by is this illustrated advertexplanation; in addition to explaining the project which it does very well of course, it may just be the fastest way to inform an average person about fairly advanced computing concepts and coding practices. (Don't even bother saying that nothing new has been developed in CS since the 70s; yes, it's true, but back then they weren't "practices" - it's really taken a while.)
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
It's a real step up from one illustrated computer book I looked at which had, I kid you not, a figure comparing a "real tree" (with totally generic arboreal drawing) with a "binary tree" (box/line representation of nodes/edges), with absolutely no explanation of what the hell a binary tree was good for!
Carnegie Mellon uses the "Cartoon Guide to Statistics" as a required text in its intro courses. I have myself read the "Cartoon Guide to Biology" as a total newbie and can very safely say I learned a lot more in the hour or so I spent doing so, than in any hour taking a biology course. These have the bonus over the google cartoon of copious citations making them even more valuable. (Though it's understandable since the google cartoon is primarily an advert.)
As far as learning-per-novice's-second goes, cartoons are the way to go as long as they are done with care and expertise. Scott McCloud earned his undoubtedly fat paycheck from Google. I wonder how long it took him to pull this thing together.
http://www.tvsquad.com/2008/08/15/mtv-plans-remake-of-the-rocky-horror-picture-show/
I only mention this because a few years ago I watched RHPS on VH1. They actually pixellated the boobs of the Medusa-ray statues at the end. Presumably exposed plaster cast boobies would have offended the delicate sensibilities of RHPS fans.
Then again, I once attended a high school medley musical with Time Warp as one of the pieces. That was strange. I think RHPS is finally being entrenched as one of those aged edgy remembrances for the establishment to rehash and foist upon the world, with product placements for all. It took a while.
I only mention this because a few years ago I watched RHPS on VH1. They actually pixellated the boobs of the Medusa-ray statues at the end. Presumably exposed plaster cast boobies would have offended the delicate sensibilities of RHPS fans.
Then again, I once attended a high school medley musical with Time Warp as one of the pieces. That was strange. I think RHPS is finally being entrenched as one of those aged edgy remembrances for the establishment to rehash and foist upon the world, with product placements for all. It took a while.
our enemy murders, among us.
Aug. 26th, 2008 04:12 pmAnd he does not forgive, neither forget.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/science/26crow.html
Show no mercy toward the crow, for you will receive none.
(Previously: http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/crow/)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/science/26crow.html
Show no mercy toward the crow, for you will receive none.
(Previously: http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/crow/)
meth or 'mericium?
Aug. 19th, 2008 10:50 pmThis seems to be the question of the day as regards this gentleman and his mug shot:
http://cup-of-chemistry.blogspot.com/2007/08/radioactive-boy-scout.html
I am leading toward meth (or for the purposes of argument, "non-radiation-related issues") personally. So much so that I'd need say a 4:1 payout to bet on radiation. Of course I'm assuming that there is no informed source about which one it is. Anyone?
http://cup-of-chemistry.blogspot.com/2007/08/radioactive-boy-scout.html
I am leading toward meth (or for the purposes of argument, "non-radiation-related issues") personally. So much so that I'd need say a 4:1 payout to bet on radiation. Of course I'm assuming that there is no informed source about which one it is. Anyone?
the meaning of the internet
Aug. 15th, 2008 08:21 pmOr, to borrow a phrase, "How people use the world wide web for really lame stuff."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf7imrDQBK0
Seriously, whether he intended it or not, I think this guy has accomplished what youtube was made for. The experiment can conclude, and post-theBobTalbot scholars can now begin a retrospective analysis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf7imrDQBK0
Seriously, whether he intended it or not, I think this guy has accomplished what youtube was made for. The experiment can conclude, and post-theBobTalbot scholars can now begin a retrospective analysis.
great god pan
Aug. 14th, 2008 10:55 pmHere's one of those meme thingies. I stole it and g-d willing I'll never do one of these again. Mostly I'm doing it to brag about the only aspect of my life in which I have an adventurous demeanor. The ones I've eaten are in bold. The ones I've personally prepared are italicized (and counting preparation as the hardest part of preparing the distinctive part of the dish within reason; e.g. I've brewed lapsang souchong, but it's not different from brewing any tea, and I've not smoked it myself, so it's not italicized). If I've had them in a culturally-significant context, they're underlined. I am pretty picky about it; e.g. Chinese food from Chinatown is not enough.
(no subject)
Aug. 6th, 2008 11:39 pmIf it were to come down to it, I could be bought off with just a lifetime supply of cheap sushi-house kara-age and nice bourbon, and a place to enjoy it. Add an (effectively) endless stack of good science-fiction, some classics, a few puzzles and it'd be my own heaven. But don't tell anyone, I'd lose my bargaining position.
My casual jeremiad writ large.
Jul. 28th, 2008 09:17 pmhttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dna20-2008jul20,0,1506170,full.story
I remember using this very example in my stats class last summer. Basically, even though in one sample a certain (combination of) gene(s) may have 1-in-a-billion chance of showing up at random (i.e. a false positive match), that sample may not be representative. For example, the gene may be more common in the Amish thus increasing the false positive rate. One 14-year-old overachieving Chinese student expressed concern about allowing too much freedom for the defense in a legal argument. She also didn't like my reductionist equation of intelligence to reasoning speed (I used this example for a brief and casual lecture on generalized linear models I think); she may have been right there, actually.
The genetics is a little more interesting than just that. You'd like your claims to be "conservative"; that is, the actual chance to be even smaller than you claim. However, in this case it always seems possible that there will be some isolated group of people who may have certain common genes. So do we actually model population flows and take the argument one level higher, making arguments about distributions of genes themselves being unlikely? Should we allow this reasoning in court, having seen the travesty of explanation that even basic DNA testing provokes? But then maybe it's been so hard because people have had an intuitiveunderstanding and suspicion of exactly what's going wrong now!
If not, do we throw everything out, or instead of trying to "do it right" fall back to our flawed and incomprehensible zeitgeist to make our decision for us?
Or is there even a deeper distinction between an unlikely individual within a population (legally admissible argument) and an unlikely population (inadmissible)?
I remember using this very example in my stats class last summer. Basically, even though in one sample a certain (combination of) gene(s) may have 1-in-a-billion chance of showing up at random (i.e. a false positive match), that sample may not be representative. For example, the gene may be more common in the Amish thus increasing the false positive rate. One 14-year-old overachieving Chinese student expressed concern about allowing too much freedom for the defense in a legal argument. She also didn't like my reductionist equation of intelligence to reasoning speed (I used this example for a brief and casual lecture on generalized linear models I think); she may have been right there, actually.
The genetics is a little more interesting than just that. You'd like your claims to be "conservative"; that is, the actual chance to be even smaller than you claim. However, in this case it always seems possible that there will be some isolated group of people who may have certain common genes. So do we actually model population flows and take the argument one level higher, making arguments about distributions of genes themselves being unlikely? Should we allow this reasoning in court, having seen the travesty of explanation that even basic DNA testing provokes? But then maybe it's been so hard because people have had an intuitive
If not, do we throw everything out, or instead of trying to "do it right" fall back to our flawed and incomprehensible zeitgeist to make our decision for us?
Or is there even a deeper distinction between an unlikely individual within a population (legally admissible argument) and an unlikely population (inadmissible)?
(It only applies to advertising material not the movies themselves.)
http://www.avclub.com/content/hater/the_mpaa_thinks_youre_stupid
Sourced from this interesting site: http://www.theagitator.com
The bat man
Jul. 28th, 2008 10:04 amFinally saw Dark Knight. It was even more breathtaking than I expected; of course, you don't need me to tell you to go see it. Spoilers ahead.
1. This may sound a bit odd, but the style of Joker's anarchist expositions really brought to mind an evil George Carlin. I wouldn't be surprised if Ledger used him for part of the character model.
2. Made me realize how truly awful the V for Vendetta movie was, and how difficult the V character is - it didn't even occur to me how much they watered V down, putting him in the Matrix mold. But now there is a glimpse of what would be a fair representation: the Joker as a protagonist. Many of his tactics were directly analogous to V's. In fact this movie does much more for the graphic novel than the V movie did.
3. Some silly stuff that almost intruded on my enjoyment: the cybereyes and how they work (offset by the political analogy which I thought was appropriate); as if the accountant wouldn't tell anyone else before the telecast; the misadventures of Harvey Dent seemed almost like a separate movie at times. Then there's the silly stuff that didn't bother me.
1. This may sound a bit odd, but the style of Joker's anarchist expositions really brought to mind an evil George Carlin. I wouldn't be surprised if Ledger used him for part of the character model.
2. Made me realize how truly awful the V for Vendetta movie was, and how difficult the V character is - it didn't even occur to me how much they watered V down, putting him in the Matrix mold. But now there is a glimpse of what would be a fair representation: the Joker as a protagonist. Many of his tactics were directly analogous to V's. In fact this movie does much more for the graphic novel than the V movie did.
3. Some silly stuff that almost intruded on my enjoyment: the cybereyes and how they work (offset by the political analogy which I thought was appropriate); as if the accountant wouldn't tell anyone else before the telecast; the misadventures of Harvey Dent seemed almost like a separate movie at times. Then there's the silly stuff that didn't bother me.
Interesting story.
Jul. 23rd, 2008 06:14 pmI only ever knew about the Enigma and Colossus stuff. This is another technological battle from WWII - the writing is rather poor even for wikipedia, which is mostly sourced from Most Secret War: British Scientific Intelligence 1939–1945 (OoP everywhere; $44 here as a textbook, £8 as a "brilliant bestseller" over there) which I have of course not read.
The intersection of espionage; human psychology/guesswork and technical development is really chilling to me; in particular, the buried irony of how they got the right conclusion from the term Wotan, even though it turned out that their reasoning was not valid. But in the end, who cares and what does it matter if you are scientific about things, if you only ever do them once?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Beams
The intersection of espionage; human psychology/guesswork and technical development is really chilling to me; in particular, the buried irony of how they got the right conclusion from the term Wotan, even though it turned out that their reasoning was not valid. But in the end, who cares and what does it matter if you are scientific about things, if you only ever do them once?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Beams
television tuned to a dead channel
Jul. 21st, 2008 09:45 pmThe future is fucking awesome!
Courtesy boingboing: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1035729/Britain-alert-deadly-new-knife-exploding-tip-freezes-victims-organs.html
Courtesy boingboing: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1035729/Britain-alert-deadly-new-knife-exploding-tip-freezes-victims-organs.html
sushi danger
Jul. 21st, 2008 03:23 pmEnvironmental and animal-welfare concerns about over-fishing aside it seems that tuna is in fact dangerous to eat:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/dining/23sushi.html
I've heard that tuna sushi, although often a cheap item, is actually the biggest rip-off in terms of mark-up. As a general rule, the more expensive the sushi the closer you get to a "fair" price. I wonder about other fish; these days I mostly just get cooked eel or salmon rolls from the ghetto Japanese place by my apartment. When I have real sushi (which is rarely) at a trustworthy-seeming place, I often get the edomae chirashi, which is also a very good test of their standards. When it is prepared well, it's a real bargain for the fish you get.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/dining/23sushi.html
I've heard that tuna sushi, although often a cheap item, is actually the biggest rip-off in terms of mark-up. As a general rule, the more expensive the sushi the closer you get to a "fair" price. I wonder about other fish; these days I mostly just get cooked eel or salmon rolls from the ghetto Japanese place by my apartment. When I have real sushi (which is rarely) at a trustworthy-seeming place, I often get the edomae chirashi, which is also a very good test of their standards. When it is prepared well, it's a real bargain for the fish you get.
I'll destroy you to the last amine!
Jul. 20th, 2008 03:59 pmThe use of corn as a biofuel-source of ethanol is somewhat controversial. I am convinced that, purely as a technical ethanol production method, this is an inefficient method. However I am not aware of any criticisms which take into account the full possibilities of this corn protein replacing some petroleum derivatives. Still, it does seem that you can't get very durable or special-use plastics that way - just the cheap stuff for soda bottles and other consumer garbage, so maybe it's not that great anyway.
gmail and googletalk (jabber)
Jul. 18th, 2008 12:29 pmOnce or twice a day, on average, I can't connect to the gmail IMAP server (which thunderbird really doesn't like) and today, simultaneously, I am not getting information from googletalk's XMPP/jabber server.
What is the deal? Does this happen to anyone else?
What is the deal? Does this happen to anyone else?
