rc3.org

Strong opinions, weakly held

Month: August 2010 (page 1 of 2)

Picking up new habits

In a post about the adoption rate for FaceTime, Marco Arment talks about the tendency of people not to use new features of devices that they already use. He explains that while people who were already using the iPhone when FaceTime was released may not get into the habit of using it, people who started using the iPhone post-FaceTime may be more likely to make regular use of it.

His post reminded me of something I think about a lot — how to get more out of the tools I already use. Most of the devices and applications we use on a day to day basis are incredibly complex. For example, I spend a lot of my day writing code in TextMate and Eclipse, and I’m certain that there are keyboard shortcuts that could make me more productive that I don’t know about, and features that would be really helpful that I never take advantage of. People often ask for features that already exist.

One resolution that I’ve made a number of times but never kept was that I’d try to build one new habit a day that will make me more productive with a tool I already use. That’s what the “tip of the day” feature that so many applications used to include was all about — giving users an opportunity to discover features that slipped past them. It’s also what Ribbon Hero, the Microsoft Office game is for. I still think this is one of the great unsolved problems in the software industry. We’re great at building powerful tools, but not so great at helping users unlock that power.

Vigilantes for politeness

Oliver Burkeman says we can all help keep society civilized by inflicting altruistic punishment on rude people that we encounter:

The study of happiness rightly focuses on such indisputable virtues as gratitude, generosity, and forgiveness. But any honest accounting of the sources of daily pleasure – for me, anyway – must include the exquisite joys of what I’ve come to think of as Politeness Enforcement Tactics: the guerrilla moves we use to avenge boorish behaviour in public places.

After reading it, I realized that I saw this sort of thing in action last weekend. I was third in line to use a communal grill, and when the person ahead of me started removing his cooked food, someone else just walked up and threw his two pork tenderloins right in the open space that I was about to use. (Rude!) The guy who was leaving apologized to me for unintentionally skipping ahead of me in line (even though he hadn’t), just to let the guy with the pork tenderloins know that people are supposed to take turns.

I’m going to look for more of these opportunities myself.

Government regulations and freedom

M.S. at the Economist’s Democracy in America blog writes about the relationship between government regulations and personal liberty. Here’s the crux of it:

But there’s another reason why I can let my daughter swim in the Amstel, and that is that I’m pretty sure that in a well-regulated country like the Netherlands, the water is reasonably free of heavy pollutants and raw sewage. (I would not, for example, let her swim in the Mekong.) This, I think, outlines a useful distinction between different kinds of regulation. I am perfectly capable of assessing for myself the risks of swimming across a small pond in Massachusetts, or the risks of swimming in the Amstel when lots of boat traffic is around. I don’t need regulations to protect me; I have common sense. What I can’t assess for myself is the risk that the water is contaminated by raw sewage. For that, I need a regulatory agency that stops households and businesses from polluting the river. To generalise: for risks I can assess myself, I don’t want regulations that prevent me from doing as I please just because I might end up suing the government. For risks I can’t assess myself, I do want regulations that give me the confidence to do as I please. One kind of regulation stops me from swimming in a pond in Massachusetts. The other kind lets me swim in a river in the Netherlands. One kind of regulation makes me less free. The other kind makes me freer.

I think that’s a great and not completely obvious point.

More on Gulf seafood

The Blue Legacy expedition blog has more details on the safety of Gulf seafood. Yesterday’s piece from The Daily Beast said that their tests checked for the presence of dispersants, but this article gives the impression that there is no reliable test for those chemicals.

It’s safe to eat Gulf seafood

The Daily Beast commissioned its own tests on Gulf seafood to determine whether it is contaminated by the BP oil spill or the byproducts of its cleanup:

So is the caution among America’s seafood consumers justified? Seeking a definitive answer to the question, The Daily Beast commissioned an independent lab, one of a handful certified to measure chemical dispersants, to analyze a cross-section of Gulf seafood—red grouper, jumbo shrimp, and crabmeat—for both oil and the dispersants that have prompted almost as much alarm as the petroleum itself. To further sharpen the test, we also performed similar tests on samples of those three types of seafood culled from the Atlantic Ocean.

The results? Immaculate. As with the Atlantic samples, all of the Gulf seafood contained either undetectable or incredibly minute (well below everyday federal thresholds) levels of petroleum hydrocarbons or dispersants.

I’m posting this mainly as a public service. The environmental crisis bad enough, people shouldn’t compound it with misplaced fears. It’s worth noting (as you’ll read in the article), the Daily Beast’s tests were conducted as a spot check to confirm or refute the government’s reports. They didn’t test enough seafood to reach a conclusion on food safety on their own.

The journalist’s dilemma

Finance blogger Steve Waldman explains what it’s like to meet Treasury Department officials who he normally criticizes:

Abstractly, I think some of them should be replaced and perhaps disgraced. But having chatted so cordially, I’m far less likely to take up pitchforks against them. Drawn to the Secretary’s conference room by curiosity, vanity, ambition, and conceit, I’ve been neutered a bit. There’s some irony to that, because some of the people I met with may have been neutered, in precisely the same way and to disastrous effect, by their own meetings and mentorings with the Robert Rubins and Jamie Dimons of the world.

I think this passage explains in large part why big name journalists are generally so horrible at their jobs.

More on teacher metrics

Carl Bialik, the Numbers Guy for the Wall Street Journal, talks about the effectiveness of teacher metrics this week. It’s a pretty good rundown of the risks of applying such a system, including:

  • Incentives to teach to the test.
  • Incentives to cheat outright.
  • Disincentives to go into teaching if the system is seen as unfair by teachers.
  • Problems with measurement resulting from classroom assignments.

I’d consider this piece mandatory reading if you read the LA Times piece about teacher evaluation.

The LA Times is grading individual teachers

The LA Times has obtained standardized test results from the Los Angeles school district and is using that information to publish ratings of individual teachers. There’s little doubt that their methodology has flaws, but that’s an argument for better metrics and analysis, not shutting down this line of inquiry. I am a huge believer in public education — it’s probably the most successful government program ever launched — but there’s a bit of a black hole when it comes to accountability. There’s some understanding of which school districts and schools are better than others, but very little information on which teachers are good at their jobs and which ones aren’t.

A lot of people are complaining already that the teachers are being judged on the basis of performance on standardized tests and that there’s more to teaching than improving test performance. I’d agree, but judging them on that basis puts them in the same boat as their students. Students are judged based on their performance on standardized tests starting at an early age and ending when they apply to graduate school. If it’s not fair to judge a teacher based on how their students do on achievement tests, how is it fair to choose which kids get to go to magnet schools based on the results of those same tests?

It’ll be interesting to see what happens next.

iPhone predicted 100 years ago

Tyler Cowen posted a link to a great find: a 1910 essay by Robert Sloss in which he predicted that devices very similar to modern smart phones would one day exist. Impressive stuff.

Miguel de Icaza on Oracle suing Google

Miguel de Icaza has a long post on Oracle’s patent lawsuit against Google that’s very much worth reading. He theorizes that the opportunity to sue Google (and potentially Android handset makers) was one of the reasons that Oracle acquired Sun in the first place. If that’s the case, I don’t see this going away without a lot of money changing hands.

Older posts

© 2024 rc3.org

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑