Topic Tuesday #54 2013/07/30 - "Cruel Calculus"

Topic Tuesday #54 2013/07/30 - "Cruel Calculus"

"One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic." - Joseph Stalin 

Researchers were curious about generosity in the way of donations to charitable causes. 

There would seem to be a correlation to the level of generosity when it has a face; a face reflecting the suffering. You may have heard that sometimes you "have to put a face to name" to make it matter. It turns out to be very true. John and Jane Doe see a plea for a donation to save needy children. The plea wants money to help save children by providing general life saving things: medicine, food, clean water, shelter, maybe even education, if there is enough left over. Save more with a higher donation. It's simple math really, and we have seen it in the big box stores when we stock up on items. Buy bulk, pay less per item.  It works that way with helping people too. The more money is donated, the more people are saved. So it would figure, by that reasoning, that if you are told your generous donation of x will save 1,000 children, you would be inclined to save that number. But that is not how our brains work. That 1,000 is a statistic. The numbers somehow make our brains just say "Nope". 

Do you want to save kids? Of course you do. Do you want to save lots of kids? Sure you do. Do you want to save this particular kid that has a picture and a life story and will write you a gratifying letter saying thank you? OH HELL YEAH!

Face recognition. You put their picture next to a pledge amount. If you leave the donation amount up to the common man (or woman of course) you get this approximate distribution.

The breakdown of average voluntary donations results in a counterintuitive way. Sometimes like a tip at a restaurant...

Example:
Save 1,000 children ≈ $20 donation
Save 100 ≈ $20
Save 10 ≈ $25
Save 1 ≈ $50

Save 1 very specific child  ≈ $75

It's the way we are wired, or so the numbers bear out. 

It's cruel calculus. But given that we can easily be manipulated by pictures and possibly made up tales of strife, some organizations may be inclined to use this against you to benefit the other 999 hungry mouths to feed. In this case, I think that is a good idea. What do you think?

Topic Tuesday #14 2012/10/23 "The Signal and the Noise"

Tuesday #14 2012/10/23 "The Signal and the Noise"

Last night was the final debate of this presidential election season. (I am going to refrain from partisan support in this post, but those that have read my work before will inherently know where I lean.) The talk was heated, but fluffy through most of the debates. All of the debates were far less about facts than they were puffed chests, interrupting the moderator, going over on time, and the ever so important last word. They were quite entertaining, and even sickening at times. Overall, I would give them 2.5 stars out of 5 for a you should have seen them, but didn't need to since it wasn't anything new, AT ALL. 

This leads into today's topic. 

We are getting a lot of noise through the media outlets and mailings and signs in years, and graffiti on said signs, and stump speeches and rolling roadblocks when they come to our cities etc... How do we filter the noise to get the right signal? I have been talking to several colleagues about the polls and who is doing well where and it never fails that when I bring up a website or media outlet, it is immediately disparaged and dismissed because of their slant. I bring up another, and another, and another; then dig deeper to find where they get their data and show how they arrive at their conclusions. This is to little avail other than showing that I am actually fact checking and not talking out of my arse. Overall, the chat has been civil, if not mind-numbing. And that's the problem-There is too much noise and not enough substance for the signal. The most bi-partisan organizations still seem to lean one way or the other, or at least someone will tell you they do and dismiss them as biased. It seems the only way to know what you need to make a rational decision is to do your own digging and sifting. It takes time. It takes patience. It takes booze in many cases...

I have said it a few times, but I would encourage you all to read the platforms of the main parties, since until campaign reform happens, there is little point in casting a vote for another candidate (sad but true). Keep in mind that an evolution of ideals has happened and these ARE NOT the same political groups we grew up with. They certainly are not the ones your family has supported for generations. 

Some further advice: 

• Read the platforms - But do it alone, but aloud, first. If the language is difficult to get through, you are not supposed to get through it and it is deceitful by intent. Your challenge is to... 
• Critically Compare - Take a highlighter and red pen to the platforms and mark the heck out of them. Compare which side believes what. You may need to translate the legalese doublespeak into plain english. This usually makes the paragraph a sentence. 
• Look to the future -  The one that is elected will be setting policy for decades to come. Not only that, but the likelihood that they will pick Supreme Court Justices (2 are most likely this time) will weigh heavily on law going forward for a long time. Laws can be overturned and our lives directly affected by this decision. 
• Science & Education - As the song said, I believe the children are our future. If we do not educate them correctly, we lose as a nation. What is being taught is as important as how it is taught. Examine the tail tail markings of where the education is going and ask yourselves if that will hurt the next generation. The best technology that we have came out of the furnace of scientific exploration of space. This is a cold and rational endeavour that is filled with wonder. There is no place for superstition in science. Tossing salt over your shoulder or whispering an enchantment will not replace an antibiotic to make your ear infection abate. Act accordingly in this regard. It's your grandchildren's futures you will be deciding.
• ASK - If you are still left asking questions, then do not keep them to yourself. ASK EVERYONE. Communication is key. You may get some rather interesting answers but you may do a service by prompting others to ask the same or other questions. Remember back to your days in school how a single question in class could derail a lecture and make everyone engaged. It's exactly the same in real life, just you are both teacher and student. This principle is for everyday, not just politics.

In conclusion: 

Educate yourselves and Vote. If you do not vote, I don't want to hear a single complaint about the next 4 years; beyond, "Man, I should have voted!"

How do you sift through the noise to get the signal?

Topic Tuesday #13 2012/10/16 "It's bad luck to be superstitious"

Topic Tuesday #13 2012/10/16 "It's bad luck to be superstitious"

It's beginning to look a lot like Halloween around here. I see spider (the fake kind) and ghosts hanging in trees, and tombstones popping up all over the place. I'll talk more about All Hallows' Eve, next week. Today  being this is the 13th Topic Tuesday, let's chat about luck, specifically superstitions. Triskaidekaphobia is the fear of the number 13. It's one of a very long list, 530+, and it's particularly amusing. 85% of western culture buildings typically skip the 13th floor and by that same regard, have no negative numbers for floors below the lobby. Eastern cultures skip the number 4, 13, and 14 due to the pronunciation being similar to the word death in regional languages. There are a tremendous number of superstitions and general phobias. Some well placed and founded in genuine harm, but most, are irrational.  A black cat crossing your path causing you to jump out of the way, putting you under a ladder and dropping your pocket mirror all in the same motion would probably cause a superstitious person to lose their marbles.
There is no cause to believe these things, but they have become part of our culture.
Question:
What are you afraid of (irrational or rational)? Why?
What's your favorite superstition? Why?

Topic Tuesday #9 2012/09/18 "Water World - Part 1"

Topic Tuesday #9 2012/09/18 "Water World - Part 1"

© hdptcar

Day after day, day after day,

We stuck, nor breath nor motion;

As idle as a painted ship

Upon a painted ocean.

Water, water, every where,

And all the boards did shrink;

Water, water, every where,

Nor any drop to drink.

- The Rime of the Ancient Mariner

And you thought I was going to mention a certain movie where someone pees into a Mr. Coffee and gets Tasters Choice... Well you were right. Love it or hate it, Water World with Kevin Costner, presents some interesting scenarios. The only one I am concerned about is potable water. Clean water, that won't kill you. Pretty important stuff. You can live for about 72 Hours without proper hydration. Food is not without moisture but in the strictest terms, you will die from dehydration long before starvation. Now I could go on and on and on about conservation and the importance of water, but that will be for another topic. Today lets talk about solely about how much water we need and where we can get it. 

In a survival situation, water quite often is a life and death factor. If you are in your fortress of solitude, you may have a cache of water. The numbers on what is recommended you consume depends on the individual, environmental factors and labor exerted. The Institute of Medicine determined that an adequate intake (AI) for men is roughly 3 liters (about 13 cups) of total beverages a day. The AI for women is 2.2 liters (about 9 cups) of total beverages a day, for an average, healthy adult in a temperate climate. What you eat also provides a significant portion, an average of 20 percent of total water intake. Given that we are in the context of a survival situation, we will forego chat about excessive water consumption, hyponatremia. The above information was from the Mayo Clinic and the numbers SEEM high for consumption (given that FEMA recommends 1 gallon or 3.78 liters for drinking and sanitation). We will look at one more metric to determine our hydration needs: Urine.
"Generally if you drink enough fluid so that you rarely feel thirsty and produce 1.5 liters (6.3 cups) or more of colorless or light yellow urine a day, your fluid intake is probably adequate."[Mayo Clinic] This also may seem high but to avoid illnesses and allow your body to properly dispose of waste, it is a vital number. Personally, I have worked long and hard and knew I needed to drink more as I hadn't had to pee for over 8 hours. That was with what I thought was large consumption of fluid. It wasn't enough; so watch yourselves and those in your care.

Now for your consideration: Recap: We need quite a bit of water to survive on. It needs to be clean, BUT given that is a HUGE topic on it's own, I'm breaking that out into part 2 for next week.
Where do we find our water? This is assuming the municipality stopped working or you are making a sequel to Swiss Family Robinson. Brain Storm with me and share your favorite methods to collect water.

Topic Tuesday #7 2012/09/04 "Debate Club"

Topic Tuesday #7 2012/09/04 "Debate Club"

"What we have here, is a failure to communicate."  It would seem that this more true in today's world than it was in Cool Hand Luke. We don't talk to each other. We yell, or we do nothing but seethe and complain. Most of us have no relationship to our next door neighbors. If you don't live with someone, and sometimes not even then, you don't have a relationship worth opening your mouth about. We have become a consumer culture. We make very little and talk about even less. Sure we talk about sports... But that doesn't do anything. It has no purpose except for enjoyment (and sometimes profit). Why don't we talk? Even more, why do we let other people (the "talking heads") talk for us? They inflict their opinions on us, then do not listen, and we have no voice and thereby - no choice.
Why don't we talk? I remember growing up with my older parents and remember hearing about how they grew up. My mother grew up in a fairly puritan household. that meant keeping things to yourselves was the norm. Of course this seemed to be the norm for an entire generation. You only talk about religion in church, you never talk about sex, and you should refrain from talking politics whenever possible, because it's inappropriate to discuss such things in pleasant company. I think the time has come for us to stop this silly practice and discuss things. The problem with that idea is that these things have been private for so long, we have personalized them. People tend to get very heated about these topics.

So what do you think? Can we calm ourselves down and actually talk to each other about these things that we have bottled up? Am I delusional for even suggesting it?

Topic Tuesday #6 2012/08/28 "Crowd Sourced"

Topic Tuesday #6 2012/08/28 "Crowd Sourced"

Once upon a time, a man had an idea for a product or business. He had to go to the bank and borrow money, maybe a loan, maybe a mortgage against his property. Once he had the money in hand he was able to proceed with the idea. Today we find ourselves in a fascinating and fast paced world of instant communication and global collaboration. Recently the concept of "Crowdsourcing" has hit mainstream. If you have a question you may poll your social graph of followers and friends and get a variety of real world answers. Not all of them good, or right, but you will get contribution almost all the time. Now it has taken a more interesting turn. Crowd Funding. Websites like KickStarter.com, indiegogo.com and equitynet.com are providing a new way to get resources for projects, ideas and causes. There have even been some dramatic and notable projects that have been crowdsourced. Mathew Inman of Theoatmeal.com has just performed two such actions. There was a legal kerfuffle that was staunchly put to bed with massive contributions to a good cause being the result and more recently over $1,000,000 was raised to purchase land for a Nikola Tesla museum. A company called Pebble Technology was looking for $100,000 to put an Android powered E-Paper watch that will be called, "Pebble". They raised $10,266,846 through their Kickstarter campaign.

Non-profits have been using it, individuals have been using it. Some succeed, and others fail. Some get funded and fail to deliver later. It's like venture capitalist gambling, but for everyone. Pledge a dollar, and you help. Pledge more, and they may give you a cookie.

http://nistmep.blogs.govdelivery.com/2012/08/28/crowdfunding-as-an-emerging-method-for-funding-product-innovation/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=crowdfunding-as-an-emerging-method-for-funding-product-innovation


The topic for discussion today is related to the bigger picture. With the way our economy is going, these alternatives to traditional funding can provide rapid iteration and product evolution and allow more people to compete, where the barrier to entry was far too high previously. So what are the consequences? Where could this go? Do we need banks to provide loans anymore? Is this just cyber panhandling?