April 15th, 2005
|02:38 am - The people have declared a GIP, the people get a GIP|
1. A Conservative party candidate poses with a prominent fellow party member at a protest. He then edits the picture and uses it on his manifesto, suggesting their opinions have changed somewhat. (Story here.) I personally regard this as not really very naughty, especially if he had permission from the other politician in the picture, but people are up in arms. A newspaper invites the world to Photoshop the original picture more entertainingly, and prints the results. One person declares that the sign should read STOP THIS JIGGERY POKERY. (From here.) Three people post or comment to let me know about this and two more mail me links with the identical subject line GIP! Thank you, everyone. It has been declared a GIP on my behalf.
2. There's discussion of introducing pre-university tests in the UK assessing generic "thinking skills", additional to the traditional subject-specific academic tests. However, the sample "plausible reasoning" question looks frankly bizarre. I vaguely agree with their answer, but cannot really say why that answer is correct and the others are wrong. What do you think? Can convincing arguments be made for any of the other answers? For any of the answers at all, really?
3. An a capella music band sing famous video game themes - embedded Windows media file, about 9 MB. Another blog, which I shall not link to, links and mocks declaring it "bad geekery". I disagree. Firstly, I take the liberal view that declaring good genres of geekery and bad genres of geekery is inherently bigoted and prejudiced, though obviously distinguishing between good geekery and bad geekery within a genre is possible. Secondly, this is imaginitive, creative, funny geekery; I say two thumbs up and give it a glowing write-up rather than flaming the knocker.
3b. From the same site, a clip supposedly from the British game show Countdown - embedded Flash video, 4 MB, not-quite-safe-for-work video, safe-for-work audio. Now obviously it's been altered for the sake of some good old-fashioned obscenity, but the interesting question is how little. Letters 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 look 'shopped to me; note the audio cut failing to announce letter five - and there seems to be a slight repeat in Richard Whiteley's laughter, but it can't be too far from having happened. What did happen for real, I wonder?
4. We read that meetup.com is about to charge $9/month or more to people using the site to, er, organise meetups. ($9+/month per group organiser, not per attendee.) This seems to spell instant site death to me to such an extent that I am convinced they plan to back down. As they say, "We expect the number of Meetups will go down at first, but the community will rebound stronger than ever. The Group Fee will weed out less committed groups; the community will be smaller in the near-term, but it will be made up of the best Meetup Groups."
Now there are some big and vibrant Meetup groups out there, especially in the very big cities and for the very big topics, but surely fewer than 5,000 viable groups worldwide so far. If they were to say "$4/month for a group with 20 members, $8/month for a group with 40 members, $12/month for a group with 80 members, $16/month for a group with 160 members" or similar then I don't think people would object too strongly, but meetup hasn't reached nearly critical mass yet and a move like this will really stop new groups from being formed using the service. A shame. Any meetup.com's demise might well inspire competitors, but the value in the system is in the number of links, proportional to the square of the number of members, so splitting the space evenly between three competitors reduces the net utility to one-third.
5. My planned availability for the near future includes the following:
In any case, I would love to meet friends old and new should schedules overlap. (Unfortunately I'll miss bumping into LJ goths who have to change trains at Middlesbrough station to go to the Whitby Gothic Weekend this time. Maybe October?)
- Saturday 23rd April to Monday 25th April: Athens, GA and Atlanta, GA with dezzikitty
- Wednesday 27th April to Tuesday 3rd May: Boston, MA with dezzikitty
- Thursday 5th May to Monday 9th May: United Kingdom - I land in Manchester after an overnight flight and will dash home to vote, but might end up rushing off somewhere else after that.
Current Mood: okay
|Date:||April 14th, 2005 06:53 pm (UTC)|| |
Re: 2, I chose the answer they did, though it took me a minute to really figure out why. I think my reasoning was that the television is taking the place of a cube or box in that picture, so it is becoming part of the set. Were there another box shape, I think you could more easily argue for one of the other answers, but it really does seem like they are trying to make it blend with the set.
Of course I'm a designer and noticing inane things about shape and form has been beaten into me for the past six years or so. ;)
That said, I think it's a rather bonehead question and hardly something I would want on a test that's going to determine whether I get into a university or not.
I chose their answer too, I think on the grounds of elegance -- none of the others seemed nicely to encapsulate a message to which the picture would be relevant. I take your (implicit) point that it's a bit spooky though, as three of us have now gone for it...
I think it would be a better university-entrance question if you were allowed a paragraph to argue entertainingly for your choice.
(And an opportunity, for extra credit, to simplify Dale's hideous flowchart!)
|Date:||April 15th, 2005 01:54 am (UTC)|| |
I couldn't choose any of the alternatives with any degree of certainty.
a) Leaving aside the fact that the shapes are in front of the television rather than behind it, the "television relies on fundamentals" explanation seems plausible to me.
b) This one I would reject. Where's the contrast in the diagram? The television is grouped with the shapes, not contrasted with them.
c) Fairly plausible, and similar to a)
d) Again, fairly plausible. Though this relies on your acknowledging that a cone is a "fundamental" shape, which I'd disagree with (if they were the Platonic solids, I'd have a lot more sympathy with this one and indeed with a) and c)).
|Date:||April 15th, 2005 01:58 am (UTC)|| |
(And yes, "slap Dale round the head" is the answer to question 4).
Similar to my thoughts.
By the way, I really enjoyed your analysis of Who Should You Vote For? in a comment to beingjdc
's Friends-locked entry on the same - it goes a long way to explaining just why it's such a rubbish quiz. Might I use your analysis for a putative later post and quote you, please?
|Date:||April 15th, 2005 03:40 am (UTC)|| |
Of course. There was also some discussion on mobbsy
|Date:||April 15th, 2005 04:08 am (UTC)|| |
Current weightings for the quiz (only three answers have changed in the top right hand corner of the matrix, and I'm not sure in two of those cases whether that's my fault for mistyping):
|Troops stay in Iraq||6||6||-6||6||-6|
|50% tax band||-6||-9||6||-6||-9|
|Public services or tax cuts||-6||6||-9||-6||6|
|Local income tax||-6||-6||6||-6||-6|
|Asylum seekers work||-6||-6||6||-6||6|
|Date:||April 15th, 2005 06:04 am (UTC)|| |
Discussion on hatmandu
's LJ suggests that the errors weren't my typos - beingjdc
pointed out that they'd got Green policy on Europe completely wrong, and hatmandu
(partially responsible for the site) says they changed the weightings accordingly.
Depends which course you're applying for, I'd say - perhaps some admissions tutors could use it to smell practiced-at-a-young-age accomplished bullshitters miles off...
Neither would I, but see bateleur
's comment below. He smart.
No Pokery!!!! LOL Wish I was independently wealthy so that I could travel. ;) Decide if you're going to TWH yet? What about Lumos? You doing the games there?
I've asked the friend with whom I would need to swap shifts whether she's available for the swap and hope to know one way or the other in the next week. (I meant to ask earlier, but unfortunately she lost her mother too very shortly after I lost mine, so I didn't want to press the issue...) Currently I'd say it's about 35% likely, 65% unlikely.
Lumos: it would be nice to go, especially if TWH proves impossible, but definitely no decision before I find out what my shift pattern is next year, then to thoughts about budgeting. I'm more likely to be a player than a staff member if I do go.
The "CUNTFLAPS" didn't actually happen. I play in a Countdown league on MSN; the Yahoo group's digests generally come with recaps of actual games... if you notice the score was 0-0 so it was clearly round one... there was no round one that had "CUNTFLAPS" as the selection.
OH, also, here's proof it's fake: only two vowels? You have to choose between 3-5 vowels per letters round. Definitely a fake.
Excellent analysis - I hadn't spotted the "round one" clue. Theoretically there shouldn't be too many episodes with the new set where both contestants were priests, so it should be easy to find out the real round one letters from there.
I'll catch you in Boston this time, promise! None of us allowed to get sick!
Hooray! Looking forward to it. :-)
I found the question quite good, actually.
What I like about it is that it tests whether you can separate ideas from non-falsifiable but otherwise worthless statements.
One of the great strengths of mathematics is that if person A and person B disagree on a mathematical issue one of them can often be proven completely wrong to the extent that all discussion ends. This is much harder to do in some other fields and it's quite possible for competing "schools of thought" to arise which last for years (or even the lifespans of those involved) despite the fact one side is essentially talking cobblers.
What worries me about this kind of question is the potential for the examiner to be wrong. That could lead to some serious (and very hard to spot or fix) trouble.
Excellent insight which gets to the root of the issue. Hadn't grasped that.
We read these days about computer marking of essays. The story which made the headlines is a system which does not use the computer essay-marking scheme as definitive but merely treats the computer grade as indicative for early feedback during assessment, but it's also interesting that there have been trials of essay marking in the US's GRE test (see here
) which have apparently proved remarkably accurate. Can a computer really make worthwhile judgments on people's manner of expression? Jumping slightly, can a computer really pick out an idea from a non-falsifiable but otherwise worthless statement?
Can a computer really pick out an idea from a non-falsifiable but otherwise worthless statement?
This must surely be one of the toughest questions in the young field of artificial intelligence.
Certainly a partial answer would be: Not yet !
When I took the US GREs in 1979 or so, they were ALL multiple choice, so of course a computer could score them.
I was especially not impressed by stuff like: my scores in US and European history were only two points apart, despite the fact that I'd spent 4 years studying US history and barely dipped into Eurohistory at all. The inferences that I drew were that good test-taking strategy (if you can eliminate 1 it's in your interest to guess) and "smatterings of knowledge" were more critical to success in the test than actual understanding.
I'm actually thrilled that they added a writing section.
One of my professors here has his TAs mark essays according to David Kolb's aspects of learning, except he uses more than four (this reference
only has four). They don't analyse the content, but the processes used. If you simply report what happened, you fail. If you analyse what happened, you get "credit". If you relate your analysis to "the literature" and/or analyse your analysis (ideally both) you get "distinction" or "high distinction". He says using this system, the TAs agree a lot more on the grades than they did before he instituted it. I think it would be hard for a computer to apply, though.
still off topic, but loving your journal as always / eq
P.S. Have a great trip!
The point where I start to worry is the point where a written argument is reduced to a binary decision: does include / does not include, does convince / does not convince. It smacks of either there being one right answer, or a fixed number of right answers, with no latitude given to the possibility of crediting an alternative and unexpected but worthy answer. The "plausible reasoning" question pushes my buttons by doing exactly that straight away.
Thanks - and wonderful to hear from you again!
I'm so excited to see you next weekend! It's going to be great to hang with you again - especially in my town!
Looking forward to it! I don't really know what to expect, but that's OK, and the company will be fun, so what's not to like?
and now - a hedge against dementia!
Actually I came over here because Megan and I wanted you and Meg to see this, if you haven't already; emphasis ours
Pessimism Raises Dementia Risk, Study Finds
Thu Apr 14, 5:59 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Pessimistic, anxious and depressed people may have a higher risk of dementia, U.S. researchers reported on Thursday.
A study of a group of 3,500 people showed that those who scored high for pessimism on a standardized personality test had a 30 percent increased risk of developing dementia 30 to 40 years later.
Those scoring very high on both anxiety and pessimism scales had a 40 percent higher risk, the study showed.
"There appears to be a dose-response pattern, i.e., the higher the scores, the higher the risk of dementia," Dr. Yonas Geda, a neuropsychiatrist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota who led the study, said in a statement.
Geda and colleagues looked at the medical records of 3,500 men and women who lived near the clinic between 1962 and 1965.
They all took the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, a standard personality and life experience test, Geda's team told a meeting of the American Academy of Neurology in Miami.
In 2004 the team interviewed the participants or family members.
Those who scored higher for anxiety and pessimism on the test were more likely, as a group, to have developed dementia by 2004, including Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia.
This did not mean a person who is pessimistic could assume he or she has a higher risk of developing dementia.
"One has to be cautious in interpreting a study like this," Geda said.
"One cannot make a leap from group level data to the individual. Certainly the last thing you want to do is to say, 'Well, I am a pessimist; thus, I am doomed to develop dementia 20 or 30 years later,' because this may end up becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy."
And there is not any specific way to prevent dementia, although many studies have shown that a healthy diet, exercise, keeping active in other ways, doing puzzles
and other activities lower the risk.
Re: and now - a hedge against dementia!
Definitely true. At the third Mind Sports Olympiad, we had a relative celebrity (Magnus Magnusson
) perform the grand opening and talk about opsimathy - learning acquired late in life - and mind sports' benefits towards the same.
|Date:||April 15th, 2005 07:38 am (UTC)|| |
* Saturday 23rd April to Monday 25th April: Athens, GA and Atlanta, GA with dezzikitty
* Wednesday 27th April to Tuesday 3rd May: Boston, MA with dezzikitty
Whoops, wrong coast! (We will be in the LAX area from this Sunday until Thursday 28th.)
* Thursday 5th May to Monday 9th May: United Kingdom - I land in Manchester after an overnight flight and will dash home to vote, but might end up rushing off somewhere else after that.
Election party? :-)
Very much so. Am looking forward to finding out what's going on that evening in more detail.
Enjoy LA! (Are you doing the Frequent Flyer miles thing? A return trip to LA with, say, Virgin would be worth 10,884 flying club miles each, which is almost enough for a free return with bmi. There are referrer bonuses to be had, too...)
|Date:||April 19th, 2005 01:52 pm (UTC)|| |
Are you doing the Frequent Flyer miles thing?
We both have accounts on Continental
's frequent flyer programme
(I had presumed smallclanger
to be ineligible, but that may have been a wrong assumption); although we came on a Virgin Atlantic plane we were actually on flight CO8227 through the wonders of the code-share system.
I'm not sure how your miles arithmetic works out, but anyway we stand to get 11,688 miles each and I should get another 1,000 miles for having booked online. Miles aren't transferrable, but I have 39,912 miles already so after we get back I should have enough for one transatlantic return ticket.
You are doing this the right way round! If you are on a Virgin Atlantic plane but with a Continental flight number - which is often cheaper in my experience - you can get credit in Continental's OnePass, but not in Virgin's Flying Club. I did exactly that last time.
Continental... *checks* finally have added credit for my return leg with Virgin to my account. Took them a while, but it got there in the end. Currently I have 49,001 Delta miles and 13,231 Continental miles. I am flying with Delta next and earning on Continental, but will do one domestic leg credited to Delta to get me to 50k and a transatlantic flight. After about four years of effort.
You should indeed. Hurrah!
Incidentally, 10,000 miles gets you a free return within the UK on flyBE...
|Date:||April 18th, 2005 04:39 pm (UTC)|| |
Unfortunately, April 23 is the one Saturday I have to work this month--otherwise, we'd love to come to Georgia and say hi.
Thanks for thinking of us! There will be opportunities in the future, I am quite sure. :-)