These are my slighted edited comments on the Vlogbrothers video by Hank Green on the very bad User Experience of YouTube Subscriptions that Google made even worse recently (I take it that is what happened, I avoid that by using RSS feeds to access the content I want to view).
Google has been really bad at UX (user experience) for a long time. I use RSS feeds to manage the content I want to enjoy and it works great (for blogs and You Tube and podcasts). Thankfully Google hasn't broken this yet (though given their track record in the last 10 years it would not surprise me if they do at some point).
Of course it will be easy for creators to generate their own RSS feed for their videos if Google does break it. I created several feeds on my personal site for (selected blog posts by John Hunter and a time travel feed for my blog posts*).
By the way Hank, it would be great if you would create RSS feeds that let me do things like subscribe to specific courses in crash course. Frankly, I have long thought it is pretty lame that this doesn't exist. This link to Crash Course literature videos for example should have an RSS feed of all the videos. Given Google's lame Ux it isn't so amazing that it is missing an RSS feed. But it is super easy to create a RSS feed from some [whatever your corporate overload name is - nerdfighters or ?] that let people easily have feeds that have good Ux and give them the granularity to pick what they want to add to an RSS reader.
As you mentioned in your video, while many users may have failed to take advantage of RSS readers, many power users have. So cater to them. Also encourage others to use this extremely useful tool which does many great things including shielding your from the extremely bad Ux practices of many of the huge internet giants.
* the Curious Cat time travel feed adds a new post each day using posts from my blogging history (which stretches back 14 years now).
Related: Curious Cat Travel YouTube channel - Filter Out Links to Lame Websites on Reddit - Getting Around Bad Web Page Layouts - Poor Web Site User Experience (Ux) for Investing Data
Showing posts with label technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label technology. Show all posts
Friday, May 25, 2018
Friday, February 16, 2018
Critical Thinking is Needed to Counter Propaganda
As everyone expected the continuing investigation by the US Justice Department has further detailed the attempts by Russians to spread propaganda and influence the USA election. I find it amazing that the Trump Administration and many Republican representatives have continually attempted to discredit the attempts to investigate the actions taken by Russians to interfere in the USA election.
As with any attempts to manipulate people through propaganda, misinformation and distraction the solution is critical thinking and transparency.
The attempts by talking heads to turn the focus to the paper and pencil used (or the which particular websites were) to spread the misinformation and propaganda should be a transparent attempt to misdirect our next steps. What is needed is for this investigation to continue and expand. And I really don't understand how political leaders can be cooperating with attempts to block investigations into the attempts to subvert democracy by foreign actors.
Acting as though Facebook or Twitter are the focus is about as useful as saying text and spoken language are responsible. Sure there is some amount of looking at the lack of transparency of any speech (and who is hiding behind the lack of transparency). And to some extent that specific risk (people pretending to be something other than what they are) is an issue on various webs sites. But the issue isn't the website it is the lack of transparency and that lack of transparency is what needs to be addressed (whether it is on Twitter or using front interest groups to hide the identity of those special interests, or using advocacy groups to run ads on TV without disclosing clearly who is funding those organizations, etc.).
Photo of the White House in Washington, DC
There is a great deal of history of Russian money being used to finance Donald Trump's businesses. Donald Trump's refusal to provide transparency about that should have been enough to keep people from voting for him to be President but it was not. Given that history and the evidence that has been known to our political representatives for more than a year it is unconscionable that many of them have not demanded investigation into these very deep ties and the deep ties to others in the administration (such as Jared Kushner).
That Russians used propaganda and misinformation to attempt to get voters to vote for Trump is important. But the main thing that should have prevented those attempts is sensible critical thinking. The best defense against propaganda is critical thinking and transparency. If the population is trained and accepts being lead to conclusions with obvious propaganda it doesn't matter if you shut off one path for propaganda, others will emerge.
What you need to do is create an expectation of reasoned debate. Sadly the USA has done a very poor job of this. We have allowed politicians get away with obviously false claims. We have promoted not critical thinking but the unthinking following of propaganda.
Until we greatly increase the respect for critical thought and debate we are in trouble. It doesn't matter much what form those seeking to use propaganda use to manipulate people what matters is how susceptible a large number of people are to propaganda.
All talking heads that are interested in democracy and patriotism should be calling on the exploration and the making visible the ties between those with large financial ties to Russia and the attempts to block and weaken efforts to investigate the meddling in our election. My guess is we will instead see the continued attempts oto hindering investigations into making visible what should be made transparent.
On an somewhat related and important matter, for at least 10 years the extremely poor computer security of the voting process has been noted by computer experts and ignored by our governments (federal, state and local). It doesn't appear that direct hacking of votes took place in the last election. The continued failure to adopt secure voting methods is a disgrace. And it seems we may well continue to neglect this matter until an election is impacted with direct evidence of large scale abuse. This is obviously an extremely poor way to manage a process that is critical to a functioning democracy.
Related: Preaching False Ideas to Men Known to be Idiots - The USA Should be Ashamed of Who We have Elected - The People We Elect Recently Are Dramatically Falling Us - When You See the Problem as Capitalism Instead of Corruption You Seek to Solve the Wrong Problem - Money Is Corrupting Our Political Process
As with any attempts to manipulate people through propaganda, misinformation and distraction the solution is critical thinking and transparency.
The attempts by talking heads to turn the focus to the paper and pencil used (or the which particular websites were) to spread the misinformation and propaganda should be a transparent attempt to misdirect our next steps. What is needed is for this investigation to continue and expand. And I really don't understand how political leaders can be cooperating with attempts to block investigations into the attempts to subvert democracy by foreign actors.
Acting as though Facebook or Twitter are the focus is about as useful as saying text and spoken language are responsible. Sure there is some amount of looking at the lack of transparency of any speech (and who is hiding behind the lack of transparency). And to some extent that specific risk (people pretending to be something other than what they are) is an issue on various webs sites. But the issue isn't the website it is the lack of transparency and that lack of transparency is what needs to be addressed (whether it is on Twitter or using front interest groups to hide the identity of those special interests, or using advocacy groups to run ads on TV without disclosing clearly who is funding those organizations, etc.).
Photo of the White House in Washington, DC
There is a great deal of history of Russian money being used to finance Donald Trump's businesses. Donald Trump's refusal to provide transparency about that should have been enough to keep people from voting for him to be President but it was not. Given that history and the evidence that has been known to our political representatives for more than a year it is unconscionable that many of them have not demanded investigation into these very deep ties and the deep ties to others in the administration (such as Jared Kushner).
That Russians used propaganda and misinformation to attempt to get voters to vote for Trump is important. But the main thing that should have prevented those attempts is sensible critical thinking. The best defense against propaganda is critical thinking and transparency. If the population is trained and accepts being lead to conclusions with obvious propaganda it doesn't matter if you shut off one path for propaganda, others will emerge.
What you need to do is create an expectation of reasoned debate. Sadly the USA has done a very poor job of this. We have allowed politicians get away with obviously false claims. We have promoted not critical thinking but the unthinking following of propaganda.
Until we greatly increase the respect for critical thought and debate we are in trouble. It doesn't matter much what form those seeking to use propaganda use to manipulate people what matters is how susceptible a large number of people are to propaganda.
All talking heads that are interested in democracy and patriotism should be calling on the exploration and the making visible the ties between those with large financial ties to Russia and the attempts to block and weaken efforts to investigate the meddling in our election. My guess is we will instead see the continued attempts oto hindering investigations into making visible what should be made transparent.
On an somewhat related and important matter, for at least 10 years the extremely poor computer security of the voting process has been noted by computer experts and ignored by our governments (federal, state and local). It doesn't appear that direct hacking of votes took place in the last election. The continued failure to adopt secure voting methods is a disgrace. And it seems we may well continue to neglect this matter until an election is impacted with direct evidence of large scale abuse. This is obviously an extremely poor way to manage a process that is critical to a functioning democracy.
Related: Preaching False Ideas to Men Known to be Idiots - The USA Should be Ashamed of Who We have Elected - The People We Elect Recently Are Dramatically Falling Us - When You See the Problem as Capitalism Instead of Corruption You Seek to Solve the Wrong Problem - Money Is Corrupting Our Political Process
Sunday, February 28, 2016
An Advocate for Open Access and Privacy Has Been Nominated to be the Librarian Of Congress
The Librarian Of Congress sounds like an unimportant position but it actually is very important for the influence they have over copyright policy in the USA (and the world because of how the USA prioritizes copyright over important national interests).
President Obama Nominates New Librarian Of Congress Who Supports Open Access, Fights Against Surveillance
This is very good news. The broken copyright system is a deadly diseases for the USA economy and has done great damage for a long time. This is a one small step that could reduce the damage that is done. It is good to see President Obama taking a good step in this direction given how much damage he has done with his many other policy decisions, including Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and TTIP.
Not blackballing someone because they believe in privacy is also somewhat remarkable given the consistent efforts of President Obama to greatly enhance the survailence state in the USA.
In President Obama's statement he says
This is a good step. I hope she is confirmed. But it is one decision moving the right direction compared to a huge number of initiatives making copyright more damaging to the USA and globaly economy. So while I am glad for this one step, it doesn't come close to erasing all the damage his adminstration has done.
Related: Why Copyright Extension is a Very Bad Idea (2009) - Librarians Standing Up to the Madness (2009) - Library of Congress in Washington DC - I Strongly Support Elizabeth Warren and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
President Obama Nominates New Librarian Of Congress Who Supports Open Access, Fights Against Surveillance
Hayden was one of the leading voices speaking out against surveillance. As President of the American Library Association at the time when the PATRIOT Act was being debated, she was vocal in opposition, especially to Section 215, which was used to create the phone metadata program that Ed Snowden revealed. What many people forget is that it was the librarians who were most vocal about Section 215 when it was first proposed, as many people thought it would be used to demand things like library records to see what was being checked out -- and librarians are big supporters of privacy.
She's also spoken out for years about the value of free access to information. Here's a 2003 profile of Hayden in Ms. Magazine (where she was named Woman of the Year) in which she notes:
“Libraries are a cornerstone of democracy—where information is free and equally available to everyone. People tend to take that for granted,” says Hayden. “And they don’t realize what is at stake when that is put at risk.”
This is very good news. The broken copyright system is a deadly diseases for the USA economy and has done great damage for a long time. This is a one small step that could reduce the damage that is done. It is good to see President Obama taking a good step in this direction given how much damage he has done with his many other policy decisions, including Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and TTIP.
Not blackballing someone because they believe in privacy is also somewhat remarkable given the consistent efforts of President Obama to greatly enhance the survailence state in the USA.
In President Obama's statement he says
Her understanding of the pivotal role that emerging technologies play in libraries will be essential in leading the Library of Congress as it continues to modernize its infrastructure and promote open access and full participation in today's digital world.
This is a good step. I hope she is confirmed. But it is one decision moving the right direction compared to a huge number of initiatives making copyright more damaging to the USA and globaly economy. So while I am glad for this one step, it doesn't come close to erasing all the damage his adminstration has done.
Related: Why Copyright Extension is a Very Bad Idea (2009) - Librarians Standing Up to the Madness (2009) - Library of Congress in Washington DC - I Strongly Support Elizabeth Warren and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
The Art of a MacBook Pro Crash
I was watching this video, listening to Hank Green talk about how he appreciated art (even if he didn't always understand it of feel comfortable with it and how it is often presented) and was grateful for the largely unnoticed things in our lives.
He had just said
Sometimes it seems like everything is broken and nothing works at all. But when things work we don't tend to notice. There is nothing quite like knowing, as I have my entire life, that there will be food at the corner store. I don't spend enough time being grateful for that...
And then the playback of the video went crazy and my first thought was oh isn't that a neat artistic touch to show how we take for granted how amazing it is we can watch this video he shot himself and uploaded online and billions of people across the globe have instant access to it...
But instead, my MacBook Pro was crashing again :-/
When I restarted my computer his continued words continued his very worthwhile thoughts.
and not just grateful that I can always get food. But grateful that so many people come together to work hard to make sure that all of the people in New York City can continue eating and drinking and everything can continue to function. Thats not something that just happens. Thats something that people do.
Related: Appreciating Health - Action Is More Important Than Sympathy - Quitting, Habits and the Examined Life - Synchronicity
As soon as I posted this the MacBook Pro crashed again. It has been crashing a lot but this is the first time it did it within 10 minutes.
Saturday, February 14, 2015
Archiving Digital Data
My comments in response to Maintaining Your Digital Presence Is More Than Updating Your Status
This is an important topic and well suited to the Smithsonian :-) Many people don't realize how ephemeral are digital media is. It is much easier to view photos from the 1970s than images from the 1990s (that are probably locked on some hard drive or floppy disk or zip disk [remember those].
Web sites close down and go out of business. Trusting them with your history is unwise. Sharing it there is fine but you can't rely it will be their for your kids. The internet archive (wayback machine) is pretty awesome and seems likely to survive but...
The issue which most quickly causes problems is changing tech standards. But tech media are also unreliable for long term (hard drives... are not nearly as long lasting as high quality paper). Certain archival DVDs (gold plated) do last a while hopefully but even then paper last longer. It seems rewriting electronic data from one place to another is fairly good, but it is not perfect (basically you keep moving so avoid one drive failing after 10 years).
Dealing with electronic records is obviously going to be a big job for places like the Smithsonian going forward.
Related: Photo Management and Web Gallery Creation Software - Don't Lock Your Content Inside a Proprietary System - Internet Archive of this site from 2006 (sadly the next record they have is 2011 for some reason. To some extent I think they maintain more copies of popular sites, but even so most of my sites have several captures a year) - Curiouscat.com backups on the wayback machine from 1997 to today
This is an important topic and well suited to the Smithsonian :-) Many people don't realize how ephemeral are digital media is. It is much easier to view photos from the 1970s than images from the 1990s (that are probably locked on some hard drive or floppy disk or zip disk [remember those].
Web sites close down and go out of business. Trusting them with your history is unwise. Sharing it there is fine but you can't rely it will be their for your kids. The internet archive (wayback machine) is pretty awesome and seems likely to survive but...
The issue which most quickly causes problems is changing tech standards. But tech media are also unreliable for long term (hard drives... are not nearly as long lasting as high quality paper). Certain archival DVDs (gold plated) do last a while hopefully but even then paper last longer. It seems rewriting electronic data from one place to another is fairly good, but it is not perfect (basically you keep moving so avoid one drive failing after 10 years).
Dealing with electronic records is obviously going to be a big job for places like the Smithsonian going forward.
Related: Photo Management and Web Gallery Creation Software - Don't Lock Your Content Inside a Proprietary System - Internet Archive of this site from 2006 (sadly the next record they have is 2011 for some reason. To some extent I think they maintain more copies of popular sites, but even so most of my sites have several captures a year) - Curiouscat.com backups on the wayback machine from 1997 to today
Wednesday, January 07, 2015
BMW Motorcycle Factory Webcast
The video shows a BMW motorcycle factory in Germany. I find factories very interesting. As a kid I would visit factories with my father (very occasionally) as he was consulting with them. The BMW factory (and many modern factories [VW Phaeton assembly plant in Dresden]) are very different from the extremely noisy and dirty factories I visited as a kid.
For those in the North-East USA Max BMW Motorcycles has a huge inventory of BMW motorcycles built in factories like the one above.
My guess is, even if self driving cars become commonplace we are not likely to have self driving motorcycles any time soon. Still technology keeps advancing; Honda actually has airbags for some motorcycles. And BMW is developing airbag suits for motorcycle riders.
Related: Self Balancing Enclosed Motorcycle - Wave Disk Engine Could Increase Efficiency 5 Times - Webcast on Machine That Bores Subway Tunnels - Should You Consider a Career in Manufacturing?
Thursday, November 27, 2014
Deleting Apps on iOS When the "x" is Missing
I recently bought an iPad mini. Unlike many people that say they interface is wonderful I find it to be annoying and lacking and not up to what I expected from computer applications 15 years ago, forget what I expect today. But I guess I am in the minority.
Well I couldn't delete an app. I followed the instructions
I went to a Apple reseller store and they were able to figure out that in settings there were restrictions set. Why the Ux doesn't have the x and then when you use it gives a challenge to prove you can override the restriction is beyond me. But lots of the Ux decisions they make in iOS are beyond me.
Anyway what you have to do is go into settings and then restrictions then type in your passcode then you can delete it. You also then can see the restrictions and turn some off if you want. I am sure I got some advice on making things more secure (the security setup seems horrible to me - the Ux makes being secure a real pain so encourages bad security). And stuff like fingerprint "password" is lame. "fingerprint" is username not password. But whatever, that should let you delete stuff.
Related: Bad iTunes Ux and How to Submit a Podcast to iTunes - Use Urls – Don’t Use Click x, Then Click y, Then Click z Instructions - Poor Web Site User Experience (Ux) for Stock Market Data (post is from over a year ago but the problem remains) - Gobbledygook (bad password usability)
Well I couldn't delete an app. I followed the instructions
- "click" an icon and keep holding it down until all the icons "vibrate"
- "click" the x to delete what you want (note Apple doesn't let you delete the apps they don't want deleted - their default apps - I guess the same idea as them forcing some music streaming junk in the next version of extremely bloated iTunes, that seems to be verging on becoming unremovable crap-ware)
I went to a Apple reseller store and they were able to figure out that in settings there were restrictions set. Why the Ux doesn't have the x and then when you use it gives a challenge to prove you can override the restriction is beyond me. But lots of the Ux decisions they make in iOS are beyond me.
Anyway what you have to do is go into settings and then restrictions then type in your passcode then you can delete it. You also then can see the restrictions and turn some off if you want. I am sure I got some advice on making things more secure (the security setup seems horrible to me - the Ux makes being secure a real pain so encourages bad security). And stuff like fingerprint "password" is lame. "fingerprint" is username not password. But whatever, that should let you delete stuff.
Related: Bad iTunes Ux and How to Submit a Podcast to iTunes - Use Urls – Don’t Use Click x, Then Click y, Then Click z Instructions - Poor Web Site User Experience (Ux) for Stock Market Data (post is from over a year ago but the problem remains) - Gobbledygook (bad password usability)
Sunday, November 02, 2014
How to Turn Off Google Hangouts on iPad Mini?
How do I turn off Google Hangouts on my iPad Mini?
I don't understand how smart phone and tablet apps seem to miss super basic functions and that people actually find using such apps acceptable. Either there is some UI feature that lets you deal with super basic stuff (like turning off something you don't want bothering you) that I can't see or I think people are crazy to accept such broken software as acceptable.
As far as I can see the only way to turn Hangouts off is to uninstall it. So their model seems to be, if I wanted to turn my car off I had to sell it. Then when I want to use it again I have to buy it, reregister it, reset… What kind of idiocy is this? I would say this is impossibly stupid and I must be missing some setting somewhere, but there are not that many buttons to push, it seems like I have tried looking everywhere numerous times and uninstalling is the only way to turn it off. But maybe I am wrong, please tell me how to do so, if I am?
Also having used several apps now for awhile, missing super basic things seems common. It seems like apps have reverted to failing to do super basic stuff that even bad software has done for a couple decades so having to un-install in order to turn something off, while amazingly lame, may actually the true level of service provided by the app.
Also how the bleep to you stop nagware idiocy on items you purchase asking you to do their marketing for them by posting app reviews? It is extremely common in the few apps I use to have this nagware that hasn't been seen in a decade in the software I use (I used to get nagware for freeware software over a decade ago).
Related: Complicating Simplicity - If Tech Companies Made Sudoku - Bad Visual Controls in Software
I don't understand how smart phone and tablet apps seem to miss super basic functions and that people actually find using such apps acceptable. Either there is some UI feature that lets you deal with super basic stuff (like turning off something you don't want bothering you) that I can't see or I think people are crazy to accept such broken software as acceptable.
As far as I can see the only way to turn Hangouts off is to uninstall it. So their model seems to be, if I wanted to turn my car off I had to sell it. Then when I want to use it again I have to buy it, reregister it, reset… What kind of idiocy is this? I would say this is impossibly stupid and I must be missing some setting somewhere, but there are not that many buttons to push, it seems like I have tried looking everywhere numerous times and uninstalling is the only way to turn it off. But maybe I am wrong, please tell me how to do so, if I am?
Also having used several apps now for awhile, missing super basic things seems common. It seems like apps have reverted to failing to do super basic stuff that even bad software has done for a couple decades so having to un-install in order to turn something off, while amazingly lame, may actually the true level of service provided by the app.
Also how the bleep to you stop nagware idiocy on items you purchase asking you to do their marketing for them by posting app reviews? It is extremely common in the few apps I use to have this nagware that hasn't been seen in a decade in the software I use (I used to get nagware for freeware software over a decade ago).
Related: Complicating Simplicity - If Tech Companies Made Sudoku - Bad Visual Controls in Software
Wednesday, March 05, 2014
Banks Failed Management Practices Never Seem to Stop
I can't believe how constantly there are news stories about corruption and bad practices so deep that banks have to hand over hundreds of millions of dollars. To say nothing of crashing the world economies and requiring bailouts from taxpayers across the globe not just to stay in business but to limit the damage their immoral and unethical consequences of their practices. All the while the executives continue to act just as kleptocrates surrounding tinpot dictators - as everyone else is horrified by both groups behavior each dips into the treasury they have access to and takes all they can. And consumers suffer due to the failure to adopt sensible security practices in the USA for credit cards that the rest of the world has adopted.
What is the disclosure today of pointy haired boss banking behavior?
95% of ATMs rely on Windows 95 which is a poor security risk to begin with and Microsoft ends support for it on April 8th, 2014. How do we even allow these executives to remain in positions of authority (in businesses where security is so important)? And we go beyond that and allow these people to lavish cash upon themselves out of the funds held by the bank?
security experts have chastised the financial industry for putting ATMs on a PC operating system in the first place. They argue ATMs should be using software that is scaled down and less buggy, such as Linux.No kidding, plus Linux versions are much more secure from the ground up.
Ironically, bank customers have less to worry about from those nondescript ATMs found in malls, bars and tiny convenience stores. Those 208,000 independently-run kiosks, built by Triton, Genmega and Nautilus Hyosung, make up the other half of the nation's ATMs. And nearly all of them run on an even older, simpler operating system called Windows CE -- which Microsoft still supports.Jeez I don't know what to say about this. It is better I guess, but hardly any good, but maybe it is less horrible (I am not really sure). Dealing with criminals attacking credit cards, ATMs, banking web sites and banking apps is a challenging business. The governments are not doing consumers any favors by lavishing funds on spying when those funds would be much better directed to stopping financial crimes (of this sort - and also the sort engaged in by banking executives - from which those continuing avalanche of fines for hundreds of millions of dollars stem). But since governments are choosing to spy while neglecting crime prevention it is even more important for banks to make credit card, ATM and online security a priority. Instead they are making a priority buying special favors from governments of straight welfare and subsidizing/allowing risk taking (and subsidizing any failed risk taking with taxpayer funds) to give lavish gifts to executives so they can build castles and the like. It is quite a sad system. Related: CEOs Plundering Corporate Coffers for Personal Gain - Losses Covered Up to Protect Bonuses - Obscene CEO Pay - The Best Way to Rob a Bank is as An Executive at One
Friday, January 10, 2014
Don't Let the Need to Blame Prevent Safety Improvements
Reaction to - Motor Mouth: Who’s liable when a self-driving car crashes?
While I agree we need to come up with an answer within the context of our legal system, I really see the bigger problem as the false responsibility claims our legal system encourages.
Many times there are negative results that should not result in wasteful legal proceedings but our system is so focused on pining the blame on someone to write a check that it accepts blaming x person because there isn't anyone else to blame. Often that is a bad outcome. I would welcome us examining the assumptions about everything needing to be blamed on specific parties.
I do agree there is a benefit to accessing pentalites to culpable parties. I think our current system needs to accept that complex systems often have bad results that should not be handled the way we do now. The whole issue is very complex but I think there is a need for much better decisions about blame being made in our legal system. It requires much more understanding of science, engineering, statistics etc.. And less overly simplistic blaming based on over simplified models.
My father was a professor of statistics/industrial engineering/chemical engineering and worked some trying to get a better understanding of cause and effect into the legal system decades ago, for example: Statistics, Science, Law and the Environment (The American Statistician, 1983). I think we need to do much better in this area.
Another question this raises is if 20,000 lives a year could be saved by self-driving cars and people didn't use that safety advantage are they liable for choosing a dangerous option (person driven car) even if they were not specifically negligent as far as the facts of the specific case are concerned. If we know drunk driving is more dangerous we pass laws and you can't drive drunk. Even without any proof your actions were at fault your state of being drunk makes you liable. Well, if drive less cars are much safer what is the difference, logically (I realize given the current laws there is a legal difference)?
Related: Blame the Road, Not the Driver - Separated Bike Lanes Reduced Injuries by 45% and Increased Retail Sales 49% (for nearby stores) - TPP Transparency Confirms the Worst: USA Government Still Trying to Strip Away Rights of Citizens in USA and Elsewhere - Traffic Congestion and a Non-Solution - System Improvement to Respond to the Dynamics of Crowd Disasters
Article looks at insurance companies reaction and predicts insurance rates could decline 60% with improved safety of autonomous cars.
While I agree we need to come up with an answer within the context of our legal system, I really see the bigger problem as the false responsibility claims our legal system encourages.
Many times there are negative results that should not result in wasteful legal proceedings but our system is so focused on pining the blame on someone to write a check that it accepts blaming x person because there isn't anyone else to blame. Often that is a bad outcome. I would welcome us examining the assumptions about everything needing to be blamed on specific parties.
I do agree there is a benefit to accessing pentalites to culpable parties. I think our current system needs to accept that complex systems often have bad results that should not be handled the way we do now. The whole issue is very complex but I think there is a need for much better decisions about blame being made in our legal system. It requires much more understanding of science, engineering, statistics etc.. And less overly simplistic blaming based on over simplified models.
My father was a professor of statistics/industrial engineering/chemical engineering and worked some trying to get a better understanding of cause and effect into the legal system decades ago, for example: Statistics, Science, Law and the Environment (The American Statistician, 1983). I think we need to do much better in this area.
Another question this raises is if 20,000 lives a year could be saved by self-driving cars and people didn't use that safety advantage are they liable for choosing a dangerous option (person driven car) even if they were not specifically negligent as far as the facts of the specific case are concerned. If we know drunk driving is more dangerous we pass laws and you can't drive drunk. Even without any proof your actions were at fault your state of being drunk makes you liable. Well, if drive less cars are much safer what is the difference, logically (I realize given the current laws there is a legal difference)?
Related: Blame the Road, Not the Driver - Separated Bike Lanes Reduced Injuries by 45% and Increased Retail Sales 49% (for nearby stores) - TPP Transparency Confirms the Worst: USA Government Still Trying to Strip Away Rights of Citizens in USA and Elsewhere - Traffic Congestion and a Non-Solution - System Improvement to Respond to the Dynamics of Crowd Disasters
Article looks at insurance companies reaction and predicts insurance rates could decline 60% with improved safety of autonomous cars.
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
TPP Transparency Confirms the Worst: USA Government Still Trying to Strip Away Rights of Citizens in USA and Elsewhere
TPP Leak Confirms the Worst: US Negotiators Still Trying to Trade Away Internet Freedoms by the EFF
It was easy to predict the massive effort to stop SOPA would only temporarily delay the politicians anti-liberty policies. And sadly that prediction has proven accurate (not just TPP but many attempts, some successful already, to pass SOPA's provisions when the public isn't shining the light on the terrible actions congress and the administration are pursuing). They merely keep trying to implement SOPA, SOPA-like and even much worse policies than even were in SOPA over and over. TPP is just one of the most egregious examples of anti-liberty policies and the governments attempts to hide their actions from the public.
Related: Society is being shaped for us while we are busy making other plans - We Continue to Vote for Those that Sell Out the Country for Cash Gifts - Good Journalism Aids Society by Shining the Light on Corruption (and government trying to hide their policies from public debate) - Cash for votes subreddit (links to politicians sellout out their country for cash)
The leaked text, from August 2013, confirms long-standing suspicions about the harm the agreement could do to users’ rights and a free and open Internet. From locking in excessive copyright term limits to further entrenching failed policies that give legal teeth to Digital Rights Management (DRM) tools, the TPP text we’ve seen today reflects a terrible but unsurprising truth: an agreement negotiated in near-total secrecy, including corporations but excluding the public, comes out as an anti-user wish list of industry-friendly policies.The anti-liberty policies of those we elect continues. They continue to sell out basic rights to provide favors for those giving them lots of cash. The extent to which our elected officials go to hide their actions from public scrutiny is despicable. But the real damage is the consistent march to reduce liberty while providing favors for those providing politicians cash. The damage to society by this consistent pattern is enormous.
It was easy to predict the massive effort to stop SOPA would only temporarily delay the politicians anti-liberty policies. And sadly that prediction has proven accurate (not just TPP but many attempts, some successful already, to pass SOPA's provisions when the public isn't shining the light on the terrible actions congress and the administration are pursuing). They merely keep trying to implement SOPA, SOPA-like and even much worse policies than even were in SOPA over and over. TPP is just one of the most egregious examples of anti-liberty policies and the governments attempts to hide their actions from the public.
Related: Society is being shaped for us while we are busy making other plans - We Continue to Vote for Those that Sell Out the Country for Cash Gifts - Good Journalism Aids Society by Shining the Light on Corruption (and government trying to hide their policies from public debate) - Cash for votes subreddit (links to politicians sellout out their country for cash)
Thursday, July 04, 2013
I Can Spy on You, But You Can't Spy on Me
It seems to me there are numerous essentially vassal states of the USA that adopt largely whatever measures the USA really presses them on - for security or enforcing extremely long and counterproductive copyrights (the system doesn't do what it was suppose to do - instead has been turned into a system to help a few big business copyright cartel companies that give USA politicians lots of cash) but he USA has pretty much dictated legislation to numerous other nations that have capitulated.
I don't have much info but my impression is that states like Canada, UK, Germany and Australia are pretty much going to let the USA have whatever it wants. If they seek to avoid being vassal states to the USA it seems to me you have to chose a legal system and government that have shown some ability to stand up to USA pressure. I have thought this would be a smart thing for some countries to do for years but I haven't noticed any countries interested in taking on this role.
Germans accuse U.S. of Stasi tactics before Obama visit. My guess is Germany does nothing, other than making a few harmless noises. Pretty much Europe has been limited to voicing a bit of displeasure occasionally but for anything that requires action they act like a vassal state and go along with the USA (which often means big USA campaign contributors). Maybe Germany, or others, will want to step out from the shadow they have been in basically since the end of World War II, but I doubt it. There just haven't been any significant examples.
My guess is eventually some nations will, but my guess it will be nations that are not so tied to the USA and that can play the USA and China against each other to refuse to be a vassal to either one (but that is just a wild guess). How much longer it will take is the question. Or maybe people will just end up choosing between which police state policies they want to accept USA, China or some other one. Maybe countries like Canada will be like flavors of Linux so Canada is USA vassal but actually refuses to go along with a couple minor points here or there (and if you care most about those minor points you chose Canada).
It will be interesting to see if any nation stands up to the USA spying on their citizens. It doesn't seem too likely - other than a few oddballs that don't expect the USA the USA could do anything more to them, short to attacking the country militarily, and figure that isn't likely. It is odd to hear the USA talk about China tech companies facilitating Chinese government spying and then give secret order that the USA tech companies (or librarians) are not allowed to disclose that result in spying on citizens of other countries (and citizens of the USA).
Other than might makes right I don't exactly understand the philosophical system the idea that "you can't spy on us but we of spy on whoever we want"?
Here is one example of the perniciousness of the spying: U.S. officials sent back to German Facebook-mails. If you want to argue that we have to ignore Jefferson, Franklin, Patrick Henry, etc. due to big huge scary risks you must not abuse the spying for trivial matters. Yes, government agencies get caught up in their own fear mongering and grabs for power (which is one reason most sensible people and bright people don't trust government to gain absolute power to spy on citizens) and start to believe silly things like their security theatre is related to what they said the constitution needed to be abandoned to protect us from big scary things. If you use the abdication of liberty to block people from violating minor rules (such as working without a permit - the link above) in my mind you forfeit the right to claim your constitution defying actions are needed for a more important purpose.
Related: Governments Shouldn't Prevent Citizens from Having Secure Software Solutions - Freedom Increasingly at Risk - Liberty Again Denied, It is Sad How Little We Seem to Care - Security Theatre Thinking is Damaging the USA (May 2013)
I don't have much info but my impression is that states like Canada, UK, Germany and Australia are pretty much going to let the USA have whatever it wants. If they seek to avoid being vassal states to the USA it seems to me you have to chose a legal system and government that have shown some ability to stand up to USA pressure. I have thought this would be a smart thing for some countries to do for years but I haven't noticed any countries interested in taking on this role.
Germans accuse U.S. of Stasi tactics before Obama visit. My guess is Germany does nothing, other than making a few harmless noises. Pretty much Europe has been limited to voicing a bit of displeasure occasionally but for anything that requires action they act like a vassal state and go along with the USA (which often means big USA campaign contributors). Maybe Germany, or others, will want to step out from the shadow they have been in basically since the end of World War II, but I doubt it. There just haven't been any significant examples.
My guess is eventually some nations will, but my guess it will be nations that are not so tied to the USA and that can play the USA and China against each other to refuse to be a vassal to either one (but that is just a wild guess). How much longer it will take is the question. Or maybe people will just end up choosing between which police state policies they want to accept USA, China or some other one. Maybe countries like Canada will be like flavors of Linux so Canada is USA vassal but actually refuses to go along with a couple minor points here or there (and if you care most about those minor points you chose Canada).
It will be interesting to see if any nation stands up to the USA spying on their citizens. It doesn't seem too likely - other than a few oddballs that don't expect the USA the USA could do anything more to them, short to attacking the country militarily, and figure that isn't likely. It is odd to hear the USA talk about China tech companies facilitating Chinese government spying and then give secret order that the USA tech companies (or librarians) are not allowed to disclose that result in spying on citizens of other countries (and citizens of the USA).
Other than might makes right I don't exactly understand the philosophical system the idea that "you can't spy on us but we of spy on whoever we want"?
Here is one example of the perniciousness of the spying: U.S. officials sent back to German Facebook-mails. If you want to argue that we have to ignore Jefferson, Franklin, Patrick Henry, etc. due to big huge scary risks you must not abuse the spying for trivial matters. Yes, government agencies get caught up in their own fear mongering and grabs for power (which is one reason most sensible people and bright people don't trust government to gain absolute power to spy on citizens) and start to believe silly things like their security theatre is related to what they said the constitution needed to be abandoned to protect us from big scary things. If you use the abdication of liberty to block people from violating minor rules (such as working without a permit - the link above) in my mind you forfeit the right to claim your constitution defying actions are needed for a more important purpose.
Related: Governments Shouldn't Prevent Citizens from Having Secure Software Solutions - Freedom Increasingly at Risk - Liberty Again Denied, It is Sad How Little We Seem to Care - Security Theatre Thinking is Damaging the USA (May 2013)
Friday, May 03, 2013
The last thing you want to do is increase the amount of hay you have to search through
Continually growing the "security-inustrial-complex" decreases safety. Bruce Schneier again explains the insecurity our leaders are creating with their poor understanding of how to make society safer.
It also wastes huge amounts of money to create security theatre that we don't have to waste. That we allow so many billions to be used to deny our liberty and decrease our safety is disastrous.
Related: The TSA doesn’t give a hoot about security - Society is being shaped for us while we are busy making other plans - Liberty Again Denied, I am Sad at How Little We Seem to Care - Anti Liberty Sentiment in Congress
Piling more data onto the mix makes it harder, not easier. The best way to think of it is a needle-in-a-haystack problem; the last thing you want to do is increase the amount of hay you have to search through. ... Before we start blaming agencies for failing to stop the Boston bombers, and before we push "intelligence reforms" that will shred civil liberties without making us any safer, we need to stop seeing the past as a bunch of obvious dots that need connecting.Sadly it is not only security we sacrifice due to our leaders failures but also the core principles our nation supposedly stands for: "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
It also wastes huge amounts of money to create security theatre that we don't have to waste. That we allow so many billions to be used to deny our liberty and decrease our safety is disastrous.
Related: The TSA doesn’t give a hoot about security - Society is being shaped for us while we are busy making other plans - Liberty Again Denied, I am Sad at How Little We Seem to Care - Anti Liberty Sentiment in Congress
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Fruitful melding of advanced theory and technology
I like this sentence, and think it is conveys meaning. From Google Spanner's Most Surprising Revelation: NoSQL Is Out And NewSQL Is In
Google has continued to struggle greatly with customer focus, as I see it. It might be we need to get much better academic research on the value of customer care before Google will be able to adopt strategies consistent with valuing customer service - more than the throw away way they general do now.
Research fits Google's theory and technology focus. Once it can be arguably be measured in the marketplace I think Google gets uncomfortable. They plug away, but it seems like they are out of their natural element in this situation - until it is easy to find market measures of value. Some things immediately go from research to production. Some things have to be developed quite a bit - I think Google gets uncomfortable in this space, they want to hurry up and let the market tell them: and not have to rely on judgement of people doing the work.
Google's appreciation for theory is shared by leading thinkers at the most innovative organization of the last 100 years (Bell Labs etc.) but in most organizations MBA's hold sway and MBA's (in general) don't have a clue about the value of theory.
I think the MBA's failure to understand the value of theory is largely is due to the failure of basic scientific literacy in our society. Which then leads to people confusing theory in a scientific context and theory in a I have this odd ball idea I thought up in the shower last night that I call a "theory." Disrespecting the 2nd kind of theory is fine. When you can't understand the difference between a well supported theory and ignorant pontification that is a big problem.
Related: Richard Feynman Explains the PDSA Cycle - The Illusion of Knowledge - Bogus Theories, Bad for Business
Only Google solved the problems in a typically Googlish way, through the fruitful melding of advanced theory and technology.That statement does a good job of capturing Google's strength and weakness. I think Google is not very good at solutions that are not the combination of those two items (with a bit of an engineering mindset focused on maximum economic benefit thrown in). It seems to me Google wants an "unbiased" measure of performance and uses profit in that way (this is my view as an outsider).
Google has continued to struggle greatly with customer focus, as I see it. It might be we need to get much better academic research on the value of customer care before Google will be able to adopt strategies consistent with valuing customer service - more than the throw away way they general do now.
Research fits Google's theory and technology focus. Once it can be arguably be measured in the marketplace I think Google gets uncomfortable. They plug away, but it seems like they are out of their natural element in this situation - until it is easy to find market measures of value. Some things immediately go from research to production. Some things have to be developed quite a bit - I think Google gets uncomfortable in this space, they want to hurry up and let the market tell them: and not have to rely on judgement of people doing the work.
Google's appreciation for theory is shared by leading thinkers at the most innovative organization of the last 100 years (Bell Labs etc.) but in most organizations MBA's hold sway and MBA's (in general) don't have a clue about the value of theory.
I think the MBA's failure to understand the value of theory is largely is due to the failure of basic scientific literacy in our society. Which then leads to people confusing theory in a scientific context and theory in a I have this odd ball idea I thought up in the shower last night that I call a "theory." Disrespecting the 2nd kind of theory is fine. When you can't understand the difference between a well supported theory and ignorant pontification that is a big problem.
Related: Richard Feynman Explains the PDSA Cycle - The Illusion of Knowledge - Bogus Theories, Bad for Business
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)