Originally uploaded by Lottelies.
Incredibly, the Goats in a Tree stuff is not a hoax. Goats graze in these Argan trees in Morocco, and you can see several pictures of them at Flickr.
Goats in Argan tree – Morrocco
1
Category Archives: personal
Sex, lies, videotape, and Wikipedia
Wikipedia‘s latest mini scandal involves an editor “essjay”, real name Ryan Jordan, who faked some academic credentials both in his Wikipedia work and in an interview with New York Magazine. After considerable debate over the issue Jordan has resigned from his (high level) volunteer Wikipedia work and his new, paid position at Wikia.
New York Magazine conspicuously failed to find the deception in their fact checking, leading some critics to suggest this episode is best seen as an example of how mainstream media fails to get the story right even while complaining about internet inaccuracies. Others focus on this as yet another example of how the internet space is filled with deception, even in what is arguably the most authoritative encyclopedia ever developed – Wikipedia. A recent study compared the accuracy of Encyclopedia Britannica to Wikipedia and concluded they were roughly equivalent in accuracy. Wikipedia’s much greater depth of coverage means that it “wins” in my book, and I noted the other day that I have not cracked open any of the volumes of my Encyclopedia Brittanica in years.
Nicholas Carr has a thoughtful post about the mini-wiki-scandal. Unfortunately I think many other onliners reflecting on this the analysis, including founder Jimmy Wales, are talking the point of view of “insiders” who are very sympathetic about the nuances of how online identities and anonymity have become accepted aspects – some would say necessary parts – of the online experience.
Active Wikipedia folks seem to have nothing but glowing praise for Jordan’s substantial contributions to the project and don’t seem very interested in the deception issues, which itself is very interesting since Wikipedia prides itself on seeking unvarnished intellectual integrity. Apparently insiders are allowed quite a bit of varnish? Where will these people draw the lines on truth? A very slippery slope in my opinion, and in general I object to the notion that anonymity serves the community well – on the contrary it’s generally harmful and unnecessary and in cases like this provides detractors with a lot of ammunition to shoot down the idea that the wisdom of crowds is superior to the wisdom of “experts”.
This despite the fact you could suggest that what is remarkable here is that Wikipedia is so very accurate *in spite of* the many deceptions. This suggests that accuracy can spring from the wisdom of the crowds even when that crowd may be engaging – at an individual level – in deceptive behavior.
I think mom, pop, and most outsiders will view this in simpler terms and see it as yet another indication that “the internet can’t be trusted”. This is unfortunate because 1) the right decision was made here – Jordan resigned. 2) Wiki is very authoritative in many areas. Like many onliners I turn first to Wikipedia for many research topics, always cautious about accepting it as the last word but generally pleased at how well it stands up for many topics as a quick and accurate introduction.
I love Wikipedia as an info source but think the “moral” of this story is that the new web ethic – one that suggests it’s fine to practice various forms of personal deception as long as you don’t send spam emails or bother other online insiders, is very misplaced. I strongly get the idea from Wales and others that “being part of the team” is more important than being straightforward. I see this ethic in some of the activity I’ve observed in Silicon Valley as well. As an “insider” at conferences folks will share information about all kinds of deceptive stuff they’ve done online. The extension of these new Web 2.0 ethical standard creates a world of hidden identities, personal deceptions, and many avenues for illegal and unethical online activity.
As for me I’d just like the old conventional handshake and honest talk morality back, and make that ASAP if you please.
My Enhance.com PPC advertising experiment reveals very questionable incoming clicks.
In 2005 I started experimenting with Enhance.com pay per click advertising. I deposited 1500 into an account, set the daily limits low, and directed all traffic to an affiliate travel site I set up for the experiment. RoadTripsUSA.net. I’m now analyzing the results which suggest almost all the activity from enhance was worthless, and some may have been fraudulent. This is especially frustrating because I’d had similar bad experiences with Enhance’s previous incarnation – “ah-ha.com” but thought I’d give the new Enhance a chance.
I can’t be sure yet of anything other than the extremely low return on the $500 spent, but I’ll be posting more over the next few weeks from my logs about the sites that sent traffic.
I just sent this to Enhance Customer Support:
PLEASE ESCALATE THIS IMMEDIATELY or REFUND MY MONEY IMMEDIATELY.
I’ve had no responses to my request to refund the 1500 I invested in Enhance advertising in 2005 as part of an experiment in using PPC to send traffic to a Travel affiliate website I set up for this purpose.
$1000 remains in my account.
I’ve been examining my log files and it appears that most of the clicks I’ve had from Enhance were from very questionable, possibly fraudulent sources. I’m happy to share this information with you.
What is *certain* is that I’ve had effectively no business come in from my $500 investment in Enhance Clicks.
This Washington Post Article explains the approach taken by “pay to click” schemes. I suspect much of my traffic came from this type of scam, though all that really matters is that the clicks were effectively worthless.
I’d also like your permission to publish your responses to me at my blog: https://joeduck.wordpress.com
Thank you. Please contact me immediately at 800-872-3266 or by email.
Lomborg on “Climate Hysteria”
As concerned as I have been about the scientific sensationalism and downright deceptive presentations in Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth“, I was rooting for Al last night at the Oscars. Perhaps as consolation prize for losing the US Presidency?
Contrary to what many think it’s clear to me that Al Gore is sincere in his crusade against climate change, and also it’s important to remember that if the US electoral system OR the ballots in a critical county in Florida did not have significant quirks he is *extremely* likely to have won the presidency, shifting global affairs over the past 6 years about as much as you can imagine since Gore was strongly against the Iraq war and would have brought an entirely different agenda to the American political table.
As Arnold Schwarzenegger pointed out at the National Press club recently, political compromise and partnerships are the practical approach to solving problems. I really like that guy!
With this in mind I’ve been feeling too strident in my criticism of focusing far too much on Global Warming, but whenever I read Lomborg’s clear headed analysis…I know I’m right to be upset at the hysteria mongers who are deflecting us from caring about ongoing health and human welfare catastrophes in the 3rd world.
Lomborg’s got it right .. again… but nobody is listening … again.
PS – for anybody who thinks Katrina was from Global Warming *please* at the very least, review the comments by key, mainstream scientists which suggest quite clearly that it’s absurd to suggest Katrina is from warming. Also interesting. People have become so immune to the Global Warming truth they aren’t even reading any science. READ the IPCC summary!
Blogging x 10 years
Dan Farber has a nice commentary on the state of blogging after 10 years based on his informal confab with Dave Winer, who arguably is the inventor of blogging.
10 years of blogging is misleading in the sense that the true tipping point is about … now …. as blogs are now a key shaping force in so many aspects of society.
Dan notes the common criticism of blogging as a bunch of amateurs spouting junk and mediocrity. Of course blogging is all that, but mediocrity is hardly something that distinguishes blogging from conventional media. Mainstream media, especially TV, has *always* been a few shiny gems buried deep in an ocean of irrelevance and celebrity gossip. I’d rather find the gems within billions of pages of amateur but expert-in- their field-ramblings than thousands of pages of jaded professional “journalism” that must often focus on maintaining profitability or readership as much as uphold the so called standards of excellence that IMHO have not characterized commercial journalism since … hey….quality standards have never been they key driving force of journalism!
Orthotics !
After having a lot of trouble with foot pain in the arch of my foot I decided to look into Orthotics. The word sounds like a major geriatric bone condition, but actually Orthotics refers simply to supportive shoe inserts. Orthotics are a premium LIFE HACK for people who have foot problems, and I think there is not a need to invest in the big expensive or “As seen on TV” orthotics.
I’m a little flat footed, and had heard about “Arch Support” and orthotics (inserts that support the heel and arch) but it was only recently I decided to check them out after several months of pain – perhaps due to more walking than I have in the past.
Wow, the Orthotics I got, which were just Dr. Scholls off the shelf ones for $8 a pair, worked wonders and I’m enjoying pain free walking and Table Tennis at our Table Tennis Club.
Speaking of Table Tennis the site is first for Ashland Table Tennis as it certainly should be, but we should also be first for all these terms because we are to my knowledge the *only* organized Table Tennis game serving Medford Oregon Table Tennis.
My dad has also had great results with his deluxe $20 custom made orthotics where they actually took a mold of his foot. I’ll go that route if I have future trouble, but for now I’m saying bless Dr. Scholls, bless Wal-Mart, and please pass the Orthotic ammunition.
Battle Robots + AI = Trouble?
Although I’m very confident that artificial intelligences will be complimentary to humans and extremely beneficial to humanity it did give me pause today to combine the following two news items:
1) Larry Page of Google notes that he feels the brain’s algorithms are not all that complex and seemed confident that the Google folks now working on AI will have a quality intelligence developed soon.
2) Pentagon funds semi-autonomous battle robot project at Carnagie Mellon.
I wouldn’t want to have that robot’s machine gun staring down at me on the day when the robot decides humans are too irrational to deserve the planet. Of course for this project the robot will drive itself but a human will be operating the gun.
“hey, says the battle robot, would you mind plugging me into the network jack over there … for just a few minutes ? ”
Jobs to bad teachers: You should be out of JOBS!
I’m still digesting Steve Jobs comments about educational reform that will likely prove to be controversial. My first reaction is to say amen – he’s talking good stuff and I can only hope educators listen up. Jobs is suggesting two key pieces of educational reform. One is the elimination of textbooks in favor of free online content, regularly updated by experts in the field. Gee, I’d have to say that one is pretty much a no brainer, though I’m worried this won’t be clear to many teachers, too many of whom fear the online educational cornucopia rather than embracing it. This idea is more provocative than it appears at first. Textbooks are part of the insulation we have between the “real world” and school. Online interactive instruction would break this down in very positive ways, not to mention save money and bring unprecedented levels of expertise to students. Textbook: $55. Getting nobel prize winners to interact in real time with high school students across the country? Priceless. I say bring it on, Steve!
The second suggestion is to make it easier to fire bad teachers. I certainly and strongly agree with this in principle, though I’m not sure in practice this style works well in the public sector because it can reduce the morale and productivity of the good teachers and I’m not convinced there are a lot of “bad teachers” out there, especially in the K-12 programs. I’m the son of two teachers, the spouse of a teacher, and friend and relative to perhaps a hundred teachers across the country (I have a very large extended family). Teachers, in my extensive experience, are a good group of hard working folks who almost to a person are primarily and overwhelmingly interested in helping kids.
So, will firing the few bad apples help or hurt? In my talks with teachers it is always striking to me how different the perceptions are of good, hard working folks in the public sector compared to those of us in the private sector. Like Steve Jobs I’m gung ho on the benefits of kicking some major ass when needed. Incompetence should be “rewarded” with a swift boot out the door. However the private sector has this expectation where the public sector does not. Bringing the fear of firing to the education sector could bring unintended consequences such as forcing the good teachers to process more paperwork to “prove” their worth and thus diminishing their ability to teach. I’d want to see proof that “firing bad teachers” will do a lot of good before we go to far in this direction, though clearly we should help put pressure on *all* systems to allow for dealing with incompetence swiftly and mercilessly. That is not ruthless at all because the alternative is far worse as it lets a single bad worker ruin hundreds of children’s lives or thousands of products.
Polish Poets to Google: A domain by any other name won’t smell … as sweet.
A group of Polish Poets are holding out their gmail.pl domain name from the Google legal juggernaut. I’m torn between 1) seeing this for what it most likely is, where the poets saw a great opportunity to nab a name that would become a key part of the Google Mail branding strategy and did it and 2) the more entertaining view which is that “do no evil” Google is bulldozing poetry websites to make way for gmail parking lots.
Obviously the best way to resolve such disputes is a poetry contest. I submit this entry:
The Polish Poets, silently
Sat on their small domain
Then mighty Google shouted
“ON YOUR PARADE, WE SHALL REIGN!”
Na zdrowie! Said the poets, raising high a glass of beer
This ain’t no joke, solemny spoke, the Google legal tier
“But we all think it’s funny”, said a thousand blogging fools
Get off your Google ass
Give them some Google cash
And call it all … just … cool
——
Meanwhile, back at the Plex, Google says “Good relationships are built on good communication”. Heh – as long as you don’t use any POETRY!
Phil’s got more and a fine choice of title.
Progressive bifocal fix
I’m throwing out this “life hack” after finally, almost, dialing in my new progressive bifocal glasses so I can see acceptably well both at computer distance and long distance.
Problem ONE: lenses are fairly small. Not clear this is necessarily part of the problem, but I think it makes each of the 16 gradations in the lens smaller and therefore makes it harder to get the glasses to sit “just right” on your face. I kept the small lenses but recommend you get medium to large lenses with progressive bifocals.
Problem TWO: Reading Prescription was wrong. I have a pretty capable eye doctor so it really surprised me when I went in after initial problems. He sat me down next to his computer with hand lenses of -.25 , -.50, and -.75 diopters and had me experiment. This was VERY helpful and surprised him as we found I had more of a difference between distance and computer range than he’d measured with the instruments before.
Costco sent the specs back in at no additional charge to boost the lower portion of the bifocals. The new ones were better, but I still had problems with wavyness and inability to dial in a good focus on both eyes.
Problem THREE: Optical Center could be off as measured. In my case this was NOT a problem though it felt like it. She measured it many times and it matched earlier numbers. But have them do this if you have problems since errors here will create problems.
Problem FOUR: Optical Center could be off as the glasses sit on your face. This does appear have been part of my problem and I’m still tweaking the nose pieces to make sure vision from each eye is correct.
Problem FIVE: ANGLE of the GLASS is WRONG. THIS appears to have been my big problem. In general the glass should be parallel to your eyes, yet many frames won’t sit this way and need extensive adjustment. Before I got the new prescription this potential problem was mentioned *immediately* by the doctor and optical person so I assume it’s common. FIX: Take a small needle nosed pliers, clamp them up near where the little screws attach lenses to frame, and bend the ear pieces DOWN (or perhaps up in some cases?). Mine are now at a much different angle than they came, but the glass now is parallel to my face and therefore the glasses are working much better.
Note that 20 feet to infinity distance need the same prescription for most people.
Note that often eye doctors and especially glasses providers will often encourage you to “get used to this”. Generally I think this is very BAD advice and you should insist on working with the specs until you dial them in perfectly, or close.
Joe Duck 