Home

tweetledee or tweetledum?

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 8:02 PM
  • 20:43 Sometimes my credit giving has been called namedropping by insecure individuals @journchat #Q10 #
  • 21:52 So current geekcrushes @debs @mikecotton @jeffjonas get your bootie on twitter Jeff! #openbanking #
  • 21:54 nom nom making hot chocolate w miss @alleamarya who is in SF visiting... though I should be working on prezo for tomorrow! #
  • 21:58 SNORT! @myrnatheminx @jgilliam @adrielhampton you guys are killing me!!! #namedropping #deeplyvexingquestions #
  • 22:22 or RT messages u are in? RT @adrielhampton: #deeplyvexingquestions @jgilliam @myrnatheminx @silona Or retweeting your own follow fridays ... #
  • 22:23 +2 for recursion! @jgilliam @myrnatheminx @adrielhampton @journchat #
  • 18:27 pissed off about the lack of #transparency in the ACTA ow.ly/BajY #EFF #copyright #patent #
  • 18:33 ugh more #fail on ACTA boing boing ow.ly/Bans and the Canadian view pt ow.ly/Bany #EFF #copyright #patent #
  • 19:18 So anyone else see the amazing resemblance btn sidewiki and reframeit? somethin' smells stinky... #
  • 19:27 whoops how was I not following @paultrevithick #identity #kantara Sorry Paul! #<
    /a>
  • 19:52 #fail @drdigipol so mafia wars guys is a complete asshat and admits it ow.ly/Bb8T #
Automatically posted by LoudTwitter

Bodyweight workouts

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 5:35 PM
When I looked a year ago or so for a site that offered regular bodyweight workouts, including instructions on how to do everything, I didn't find anything good. But now there is BodyFitBurn. Check out their intro manual, a very informative PDF, or their thrice-weekly exercise circuits.

Tags:

The Pernicious Cold

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 5:16 PM

The cold that kept me out of work for two days last week has been sticking around. Friday it knocked Debbi out of work for a day. Saturday she felt better, but I was very congested and actually spent most of the day feeling rather dizzy. Other than a trip to the supermarket, we stayed home all day. Sunday I felt better but Debbi felt worse, and we stayed home and watched football most of the day, but I did feel good enough to go to my book discussion group in the afternoon.

We’re both slowly feeling better, and have returned to work this week. I’m still congested and have a bit of a post-nasal-drip cough, but otherwise feel fine. I plan to go to frisbee tonight, although I might not make it through the whole evening. Debbi seems to be getting better, but skipped her aerobics class last night and then didn’t sleep very well.

Friends of ours have told us that this cold is a stubborn one, and that it hangs around for a while. Other friends have theorized that we actually have the flu. I’ve known people with the swine flu and to a man it’s knocked them out for a week or more and sounded absolutely miserable. This is a particularly mild strain, if so. It might also be the garden-variety flu, for which we’ve both had shots, and perhaps the shots only offered partial protection. Who knows. The fact that it feels like a cold and I often get a cold in early November, combined with Occam’s Razor, makes me think it’s just a nastier-than-usual cold.

Assuming no resurgence of symptoms, though, I’m hopeful that we’ll be entirely well by the weekend.

(Crossposted from Fascination Place)

quantified self / sleep

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 2:29 PM
Ok, I think I'm finally ready to do some quantified self-style intervention testing on my sleep. Slept really badly last night, and pretty badly the last few, feeling really tired (but not as bad as I would be w/o Adrafinil!).

I think this will be really good b/c instead of acting according to numerous vague and unknown theories, I can actually test them. Then I can use the things that work and abandon the things that don't, instead of wondering every night which of 17 things I should do.

I feel guilty about not having done this yet, for some reason, but it was actually a strategic decision. My sleep was so bad before that nothing seemed to work, so there seemed to be no point in testing anything, plus I had no energy to test. Now that I've had the MMA surgery, my hope is that behavioral and minor physical interventions can measurably affect my sleep. Plus I have more energy to do this.

Anyway, I am open to feedback on my experimental plan. I think I have a pretty good hypothesis pool, so I am most interested in feedback on outcome metrics and the general method.

(I feel somewhat guilty working on this during work time, but then I remind myself that sleep is by far the largest factor in my work productivity - improving my sleep would be like hiring another 1/4-1/2 of a Patri, which is well worth my time to work on!)

Karen's math homework

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 5:07 PM
"Ten bananas and five apples cost $1.65. One apple and one banana cost $0.20. How much does one apple cost, and how much does one banana cost?"



Uhh, when Karen asked her teacher for harder math work, I suspect she was thinking fractions or multiplication or addition with carrying, not a system of two equation and two unknowns.

This has been happening for several years, but I've never participated in it. I was inspired to post this year because of the many tweets from my many betes homies on the subject, and of course because I haven't blogged in over six months.

Except I really don't feel like talking about diabetes. Yes, many days are a fucking trial, and November is Diabetes Awareness Month, and they're talking about the potential cures in the same way they've been doing since I was diagnosed 14 years ago (this month!), but my past three A1Cs have been under 6, so I'd like to live with the illusion that I own this beast for a little while.

There have been heavier-duty things on my mind lately.
cut for sad )

Tags:

Twittering Twit Wits

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 2:02 PM
  • 15:09 @CBC_psi The general score I have from three years ago is v.g. but the subject may be a wash this time #
  • 17:18 @RepMikeHonda thanks for working on health care and sticking to your guns. Ignore the haters, they are made of fail. #
  • 23:43 Dear BofA, If you can't even keep my account secure from internet break-ins, why should I bother being your customer? #
  • 23:43 @mykindidea Its been A Hard Day's Night #
  • 08:04 @cianaluna Are you vying to be the assistant? #
  • 08:51 If you are flying, this may concern you, OR NOT: bit.ly/1FpmPr #
  • 13:16 Read yet another piece in [mainstream circular] about rich ppl blowing their hefty severance and having to live like the rest of us. Boohoo. #
Automatically shipped by LoudTwitter

LJ vs. specialty blogs

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 1:32 PM
In general, I think my writing will be more effective if I move my advocacy to special-purpose group blogs. My level of professionalism & commitment to quality/accuracy will be higher, I can leverage other authors, attract an audience who are interested in the topic rather than "whatever Patri writes", etc. It just seems like a better way to do things.

Like, given that GNXP exists, it's useless for me to post on IQ, race, nature/nurture, or any of that stuff. I mean, those guys know way more than I do, they spend more time on it, they write higher quality stuff...they can actually sway minds. My rants are fun (and that's why I write them), but I doubt they will do much to spread knowledge or change anyone's mind about anything. Whereas widely-read, high-quality specialty blogs can create cultures around their ideas. Look at what happened w/ Overcoming Bias, it's spawned an entire community of people around Eliezer & Robin's ideas. I meet smart interesting people who read OB/LW all the time (and not just at OB/LW meetups!) I suspect has strongly influenced at least thousands of people, perhaps tens of thousands.

Anyway, I think/hope I've succeeded in doing less political ranting (though not none) since starting LATNB, and hopefully I can channel all my sociobiology into PUA4LTR. And every time I go into any more depth on genetics, global warming, or IF than a passing mention or link, y'all should tell me to shut up and write about things that aren't better covered by others :).

Tags:

Ok, I couldn't help it

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 1:31 PM

I failed my saving throw against taking on another (small) project, and I've started a new blog: PUA4LTR.

In my defense, starting a group blog has the potential to be a low-effort high-reward project. I have no interest in providing a majority of the content, I just want to get the ball rolling, find good co-authors and guest posters, and most importantly a good editor to handle the day-to-day work.

This worked great with Let A Thousand Nations Bloom - we got a great editor (Mike Gibson), I write a post every couple weeks or so, but we have a slowly growing set of authors and readership. Traffic is not growing as fast as I'd like, but it is filling a niche that I think is unserved and incredibly important - advocating competitive government and structural reform.

And PUA For LTR is also a niche that is unserved and incredibly important. There are not only no blogs on it, there are hardly even any posts on it on the numerous PUA blogs! Which is ridiculous. I mean, yeah, cold approach pickup of tasty babes in bars is way sexier and more fun to imagine doing, it makes better internet fantasy material. But what about in real life - especially when you grow up and move beyond just trying to get laid?

To some degree, this niche is served by material that predates PUA and does not self-identify. Yet this material is based on different terminology and in many cases different theories of attraction. Both are based on the real world so they surely overlap to some degree (I dunno, I haven't read much more than Gottman & Mars/Venus), but I think applying the enormous, rapid progress in PUA to LTRs is very low-hanging fruit.

Go read the About page for my...um...initial manifesto. Here's the blog, the RSS feed, and you can read it on LJ as [info]pua4ltr. Here's our call for authors/editors.

Tags:

Relationship Advice

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Awesome relationship advice from Dan Savage, linked by several friends of mine today:


Hello Everyone,

Currently this is the list of instructors who will be teaching at the 2009 Austin Area Daikomyosai:

John Hidalgo, 5th Dan, Shidoshi
Joe Peak, 5th Dan, Shidoshi
Duff Culp, 5th Dan, Shidoshi
Brian Gore, 3rd Dan
Jon Pyndus, 3rd Dan
Michael Almon, 2nd Dan
Michael Chase, 2nd Dan
David Marshall, 2nd Dan
Marc Lott, 1st Dan
Richard Fleury, 1st Dan

It looks like we are going to have a really nice turn out. I hope we see you there.


Take care,
John Hidalgo
www.roundrockbujinkan.com
www.austinbujinkan.com
www.roundrockbujinkan.com/utexas

Austin/UT/Round Rock Bujinkan Daikomyosai December 5th, 2009


Round Rock Bujinkan, Round Rock, Texas
Bujinkan Ninjutsu Club at the University of Texas, Austin, Texas
Austin Area Bujinkan Community, Austin, Texas

Overview:
We are looking at having an Austin area Bujinkan Daikomyosai in observation of Hatsumi-sensei's 78th birthday. Austin Area Bujinkan Training Get Together is open to all Bujinkan Members in good standing with the Round Rock Bujinkan Dōjō and the international Bujinkan organization. Those who are interested in Bujinkan training but have never tried it are also welcome. Anyone who is shodan or above is invited to teach. We will train for about three to four hours and will likely go to Origami Japanese Restaurant (www.origamisushitx.com) for dinner afterwards.

Date:
Saturday, December 5th, 2009
Times:
2:00 to 4:00 (or possibly 5:00) PM
Fee:
Suggested donation of $15 or pay what you can if you can
Instructors:
John Hidalgo, 5th Dan, Shidoshi
Joe Peak, 5th Dan, Shidoshi
Duff Culp, 5th Dan, Shidoshi
Brian Gore, 3rd Dan
Jon Pyndus, 3rd Dan
Michael Almon, 2nd Dan
Michael Chase, 2nd Dan
David Marshall, 2nd Dan
Marc Lott, 1st Dan
Richard Fleury, 1st Dan
Attire:
Standard Bujinkan Uniform (gi, tabi, obi) or loose, comfortable clothing.
Contact:
John Hidalgo (512) 656-2836 or instructor@roundrockbujinkan.com
Location:
Acrotex Gymnastics
708 Round Rock West Drive
Round Rock, TX 78681
(512) 244-5437
www.acrotex.com

Trust Online: A World of Warcraft Anecdote

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 9:44 AM
In World of Warcraft, some characters are, among other things, crafters, can produce useful objects such as pieces of armor that they or others can wear. To do so requires some level of skill, obtained by in-game activities, mostly crafting, and ingredients ("mats" for "materials"). At a high level, the required mats are very expensive in in-game money and the product is better—provides a greater improvement to the player wearing it—than most of what players can get in other ways.

A common arrangement is for the player who wants something made to provide the craftsman with the required mats plus a tip, an additional payment in in-game currency. The crafter makes the item and gives it back to his customer. The mechanics of exchanging goods involve each player showing what he is giving the other; the exchange happens when both approve. For ordinary trade, that provides automatic enforcement; if you don't put up what you offered in exchange for what I am offering, I don't click the relevant button and the trade does not happen. If, however, I hand over the necessary materials to a craftsman in order that he can make me something, there is nothing to keep him from walking off with them without giving me anything in exchange.

What started me thinking about this problem was my wife's account of a recent transaction . Her character is, among other things, a high level blacksmith with the recipe for a very high level piece of armor, one whose materials cost about 6000 gold. At current exchange rates—there is an active market trading WoW gold and other virtual goods for money, although Blizzard, the company that runs the game, tries to discourage the practice—that comes to forty or fifty dollars.

Someone looking for a crafter to make that item posted a query. I noticed it and referred him to my wife's character. He gave her the necessary materials plus some additional gold, she crafted his armor and gave it back to him. A satisfactory transaction for both parties.

So far as we know, she was a stranger to him. Why did he trust her? How did he know she wouldn't simply walk off with his materials, perhaps use them to make the same piece of armor for herself?

Part of the answer is that in order to be a high level crafter one must be a high level character, which normally means having spent hundreds or thousands of hours fighting monsters, going on quests, practicing one's craft. My wife's blacksmith is level 80, the highest level currently available in the game. If she cheated a customer, she risked a permanent black mark on her reputation. A single WoW server has a population in (I think) the tens of thousands, large enough to dilute but not eliminate reputational problems. I suspect that if the same transaction could be done by someone who had just created a new character and played him for a few hours, the level of trust would be much lower. The mechanism is the same one that explains why banks favor expensive buildings faced with marble and provides one explanation of why companies engage in expensive advertising campaigns—in each case, paying a sunk cost to make it clear to customers that it would be expensive for the firm to take their money and run.

There are possible substitutes for trust, but they are costly. The customer could, for example, offer to trade 6000 gold worth of materials for 6000 gold in one exchange, then give the gold back, along with the additional payment, in exchange for the armor. Doing it that way, however, would require the blacksmith to have that amount of in-game cash free for the purpose. In this case, at least, she didn't; she has not yet made the armor for herself because she cannot yet afford to do so. A customer who sets that requirement substantially reduces the number of potential transactions. That would be a serious problem for very high end crafting, where only a few crafters will have the necessary recipe. The customer also risks offending the person he wants to trade with by making his distrust obvious.

On one occasion, my wife noticed someone posting in search of a crafter with an additional requirement: "must be a member of a reputable guild." That is a way of improving the reputational mechanism, since guilds, in-game groups of characters who do things together, also have reputations. I am reminded of Adam Smith's argument in favor of a diversity of small religious groups—that they have an incentive to make sure their members behave well in order to keep up the group's reputation. But in World of Warcraft the practice is uncommon; my wife only remembers seeing one such post, and other people reacted negatively to it.

Trust mechanisms are not perfect—people do sometimes cheat. But I found it interesting that they work well enough so that the sort of transaction my wife's character engaged in, for an amount very large in in-game terms and significant even in dollar terms, is not uncommon.
As psychology students past and present will be only too aware, statistics are a key part of every psychology undergrad course and they also appear in nearly every published journal article. And yet have we ever stopped to recognise the statisticians who have brought us these wonderful mathematical tools? As psychologist Daniel Wright puts it: "Statistical techniques are often taught as if they were brought down from some statistical mount only to magically appear in [the software package] SPSS."

To help address this oversight, Wright has compiled a list of ten statisticians he thinks every psychologist should know about. The list is strict in the sense that it only includes statisticians, whilst omitting psychologists, such as Jacob Cohen and Lee Cronbach, who have made significant contributions to statistical science in psychology.

Wright divides his list in three, beginning with three founding fathers of modern statistics. First up is Karl Pearson (pictured), best known to psychologists for the Pearson Correlation and Pearson's chi-square test. He was a socialist who turned down a knighthood in 1935. His first momentous achievement was his 1932 book The Grammar of Science and he also founded the world's first university statistics department at UCL in 1911.

Ronald Fisher was the author of Statistical Methods for Research Workers, which Wright describes as "one of the most important books of science." Fisher was also instrumental in the development of p values in null hypothesis significance testing.

Together with Pearson's son, Egon, Jerzy Neyman produced the framework of null and alternative hypothesis testing that dominates stats to this day. He also created the notion of confidence intervals. Neyman and Fisher were big critics of each other's theories. After a brief spell at UCL with Fisher, Neyman moved later to Berkeley where he set up the stats department - now one of the top such departments in the world.

Wright also lists three of his statistical heroes: John Tukey of post-hoc test fame, who made major contributions in robust methods and graphing (and who coined the terms ANOVA, software and bit); Donald Rubin who has conducted influential work on effect sizes and meta-analyses; and Brad Efron who developed the computer-intensive bootstrap resampling technique.

Wright devotes the last section of his list to four statisticians who have gifted psychology particular statistical techniques: David Cox and the Box-Cox transformation; Leo Goodman and categorical data analysis; John Nelder and the Generalised Linear Model; and Robert Tibshirani and the lasso data reduction technique.

"The list is meant to introduce some of the main statistical pioneers and their important achievements in psychology," Wright concludes. "It is hoped learning about the people behind the statistical procedures will make the procedures seem more humane than many psychologists perceive them to be."

What do you think of Wright's list? Is there anyone he's overlooked?
_________________________________

ResearchBlogging.orgDaniel B Wright (2009). Ten Statisticians and Their Impacts for Psychologists. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4 (6), 587-597


Bookmark and Share

Score one for Rose

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 10:58 AM
So, I finally am at the point with my ("my") Buffalo Chicken Chili recipe where I can glance casually at the ingredients list, sort of ignore it (whoops, no diced tomatoes, guess I'll add beans instead), and still produce something delicious.

Usually, the only way I can pretend to be a good cook is if I follow a recipe EXACTLY. All of my kitchen disasters have involved me trying to be creative. All of my kitchen successes have involved me following someone else's recipe EXACTLY (except, you know, removing onions).

Obviously, this means I'm not a good cook. I am, though, a successful replicator, when I follow instructions. I think this means I fail as a human, but excel as a robot.

I'm not sure if I should be ashamed, or be glad I'll be spared during the inevitable robot uprising.

Invest in Whatever Makes You Angry

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 8:20 AM
I wonder if you could make money by investing in whatever companies make you angriest. For example, when oil prices were climbing to the sky, it was popular to hate oil companies. It also would have been a good time to buy their stock.

Before any war, a lot of people start hating defense companies more than usual. And that's the best time to own defense stocks.

During Microsoft's long run to dominance, the company was widely hated. It also would have been a good stock to own for most of that time. Now it feels as if the white hot hatred of Microsoft has reached some sort of plateau, and so has the stock.

We generally hate companies when we think they have too much power. And that correlates with profits. So suppose you took a survey of people's opinions of various industries today, then did another survey every six months, and tracked the anger levels. If you invested in any industry where the average public hatred was increasing, and sold stock when the average hatred started to level off, would you prosper?

Can you think of any industry where the public's hatred was increasing while the companies' stock prices were stagnate or dropping?

Remember, it's not the absolute amount of hatred that matters, just the direction of the intensity. There is plenty of hatred toward cigarette companies, but thanks to the success of anti-smoking laws, that hatred has leveled off. So according to my hypothesis, this wouldn't be a good time to own cigarette stocks.

What do you think?

Solfege Translation Question

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Hi everyone.

This question isn't so much piano-specific, but if anyone knows the answer, I'll be so happy!

I have a piano student originally from Sri Lanka who wants to learn solfege in his native language, I'm assuming Sinhalese? Maybe Tamil?  My silly American brain immediately thought I could just look up Do Re Mi in Sri Lanken, so I didn't ask him for details, but I quickly realized that that, um, won't work.

He could name five of them and I wrote them down phonetically as "sa ree ga muh pa" (more like peu if you kind of say it with a French accent).

I'm feeling so incredibly ignorant for not being able to find the rest of the syllables online somewhere or to not know how they do this in other countries, but maybe I'm just not looking in the right places. Or maybe in Sri Lanka they just use the English/British version?

He also said he's going to try to find out what the rest are, but just in case he doesn't, and for my future reference, I'd really like to know.

Thanks :)

aaaaaaaaa!

  • Nov. 10th, 2009 at 12:26 AM
So when I started the oscilloscope project, I idly wondered if anyone had developed an "oscilloscope-on-a-chip" - feed it an analog input, some configuration bits, and a clock and get a nice data stream back. Couldn't really find anything like that, alas.

Tonight though I was randomly browsing Texas Instrument's video-related product section and stumbled across this - it's an analog front end chip for a digital camera, and it does damn near everything you would need for an oscilloscope (along with a few things you don't).

Sample rate isn't as high as I'd like, but it's TWO DOLLARS for TWO 14-BIT ADCS WITH BUILT-IN PROGRAMMABLE AMPLIFIERS AND IT CAN RUN OFF BATTERIES.

Comparable discrete ADCs cost 20x as much.

This requires much, much more investigation.

Latest Month

November 2009
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Links

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Taylor Savvy