Wednesday, May 13, 2009

stars in the universe

My new iMac has a one terabyte hard drive (1024 gigabytes). When I started doing graphic design in 1995, my state-of-the-art Mac had 500 megabytes of hard-drive space. Everyone was like, “Dawwwg… nobody needs that kind of power, you’re crazy, dude!”

That’s a difference of about 2000x, but that’s not important now.

I hear about petabytes from time to time (1024 terabytes). I may have heard of an exabyte or two, but I thought that was it.

There is something bigger: a zettabyte (1024 exabytes) and a yottabyte (1,048,576 exabytes).

To give you an idea of how much that is (as if that were possible), a yottabyte is 8 bits of information multiplied by a number best described as 1 followed by 24 zeros plus some dust. The approximate number of stars in the universe is 10^20, so we could give each star a nice long name, take a snapshot of it,  and store all that on our 1-yottabyte hard drive.

In “researching” this article, I discovered an astounding fact. The number of possible chess games (played according to the rules) is 10^120. This is enormously greater than the number of atoms in the universe, which has been estimated at around 10^80, give or take five or six.

Here is another astounding fact: in French, they don’t use bytes because byte rhymes with a naughty word (think octopussy but for a guy). Insteady they use octets, which are pronounced octay (even if they’re plural).

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

guy hates english

(I’m American, but I’ve lived in France for the last nine years and speak fluent French.)

I just came across this book, written by a Canadian author. Michel Brûlé really doesn’t like England or the United States. I particularly enjoyed his blurb because I grew up in Amherst.

The title, Anglaid, is a combination of the French words for English (anglais) and ugly (laid). A rough equivalent would be Engly or Uglish.

Here is a translation of the author’s blurb, without exageration:

Like millions, I used to feel the incredible power of attraction of English. With time, I realized that the genius of the language, its English-American culture and its incredible attraction always resulted in a downward flattening. Beyond a decadent civilization characterized by a retarded and omnipresent cinema, by superficial music (also omnipresent), I came to understand that there was something still worse attached to this language and this culture: intolerance. This intransigeance has been manifested for centuries by incessant wars, but also by unparalleled racism: consider all those slogans like those of the Ku Klux Klan: “White Power”, “Speak White” or “The only good indian is a dead indian” (the guiding principle in the extermination of 40 million native Americans). If the Germans are ashamed of their Nazi past, the English have glorified Amherst, who first used biological warfare, Monckton, to whom we owe the first ethnic cleansing, and Kitchener, who invented concentration camps.

To crown all this, English-speakers are extremely narcissitic and ethnocentric: they only watch their own films, only read their own books, only listen to their own music, and almost always eat only their own grub—I daren’t call it food. The most sceptical will say that the French, for example, were the same, when France more or less controled the world. That is false: the French, in spite of their undeniable arrogance, were very open to the world. It is not an exageration to affirm that English-speakers are nothing less than the most ethnocentric people in the history of humanity.

I have made a revolutionary observation that could explain the superiority complex of English-speakers. Could it be possible that this complex is inherent in the language itself? I think so. In fact, the English language is a unique linguistic case. In English, “I” is written in upper case, and there is only one way to designate the other. When he speaks respectifully to another, a French speaker, Portugese speaker or German speaker puts him on a pedestal, but the English speaker, with his overdeveloped “I”, puts himself on the pedestal. This relation between the all-powerful “I” and the you, isn’t it one of subordination, of subjection? English is a language irremediably sworn to imperialism, and the negative leadership of English-American culture pushes the entire world into decadence and war. Continuing to push English as the universal language can only lead us to a dead end. It’s time to move on.

nice design makes me sick

I’ve been a professional graphic designer for almost twenty years. I’ve been feeling more and more lately that there is something offputting about most of what we consider to be good design.

As I mentioned in my post on comfy websites, When I see stuff that’s really great, top-notch design, my reaction is almost always “that’s not for me.”

Admittedly, this may say more about me than about the design.

But what I’m getting at is that good design (real good design, not pretty design) should be functional and inclusive. Too often, design by the best visual designers is shockingly well done but subtly pushes away the user/client/visitor. You feel like you’ve wandered into the opera by mistake, and you’re underdressed.

I guess the word would be pretentious, but I’m looking for something a little less negative… counter-inclusive. Often what we consider to be good design runs against the weaving of relationships with people.

For me, a design is good when it functions well mechanically and above all encourages the audience to jump in the arena and to splash some mud around.

My guess is that this is why the whole Web 2.0 phenomenon is so popular… people now feel like they can participate in the internet. They feel invited.

comfy websites

I live in two different apartments. One is a bit beat, a vacation place with older furniture, and the other is a classy city pad.

I realized recently that I felt much more chez moi in the vacation apartment, but I couldn’t understand why. I was largely responsible for decorating my main apartment, and I really like the furniture we chose.

Finally I concluded that some furniture is just more inviting than other furniture. If you have a clean, contemporary white sofa, it may look great while at the same time saying “be careful how you sit on me, don’t get me dirty”.

The vacation apartment feels like a place where I can just bang around without being careful; the furniture (and the rooms themselves) invite active participation. My city apartment, while much more beautiful, is a place where I tread lightly, where I can’t just flop down and hang out.

This brings me to a point that I will elaborate on in a future post: in designing a web site (and there are exceptions), it’s important to consider what feels inviting, what makes users want to bang around and try things out. It’s all to easy for us designers to fall into the trap of elegance and glittering perfection while subtly excluding the user.

The next time I’m designing a site, I’ll be looking for ways to make it more like my vacation place, where you come in and instantly feel at home.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

keeping your tongue in your pocket

I just read this article about circumcision. I am not circumcised.

If you’re considering circumcision for your infant, spend a moment imagining how sensitive your tongue would be after 20 years if you kept it in your pocket.

My guess is that eating would be a lot less fun.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

eggshells in your cookies

I have been learning to use the Pylons web framework, based on the Python programming language. I have no experience in either.

To do this, I have followed several tutorials on the subject. They are like cookie recipes, and make the setup process look simple.

However, though meant for beginners, they do require background knowledge.

Take the recipe for Toll House Cookies. Nowhere does it tell you to remove the eggshells before adding the eggs.

My Python cookies are full of eggshells (sigh).

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

to blurt

When you are with people you trust, blurt.

It’s better to express everything you think, whether it be stupid, sexist, or otherwise offensive.

If your friends are worth their salt, they’ll tell you, and you’ll get slapped.

Otherwise, you’ll stay screwed up all your life.

I just listened to a podcast about passive racism. Apparently, more than 70% of white people are not overtly racist. They are, however, significantly more likely to believe that a white candidate is better qualified than a black candidate for any given job.

I say get it out there so we can be confronted and heal.

Monday, October 27, 2008

clean primitive people

Whenever you see primitive people on TV or in movies, they’re ugly. I’m not talking about real tribes, but about depictions of neanderthal and cro-magnon men and women.

They’re dirty and unkempt, have lumpy faces and make ugly sounds, but why should they be ugly? Animals are beautiful—there are very few ugly primates.

The tribes that could be considered the most primitive may seem bizarre to us, but they’re never dirty or unkempt.

Why this insistance on the fact that primitive man was dirty? In all likelhood, he was magnificent—clean, well-groomed, and in great shape.

In this post-Baconian world, perhaps we seek to reassure ourselves that all this progress is really worth something.

Sunday, October 19, 2008

dazzle camouflage

This is the first installement of a series about amazing things that no longer exist. Like dinosaurs, these phenomena were once breathtakingly cool but are now gone.

During World War I, before airplanes played an important role in warfare, warships were camouflaged in a mind-blowingly colorful style.

We think of camouflage as a way to hide. However, during WWI, the goal of the camouflage was to make it impossible to clearly see the outlines of a ship. The result was that enemy gunners were unable to effectively estimate size, direction and speed.

The techniques used resemble modern art from the 1950’s, and these ships were gorgeous monuments of splashy color.

After the war the ships were repainted. Few photos remain of dazzle camouflage (almost none in color).

dazzle photo 1 · dazzle photo 2 · more information

Saturday, October 18, 2008

women’s razors

Women’s Razors Work Better
http://posnitubek.com/2008/1018%20Women’s%20Razors%20Work%20Better.html

Razor blades made for women work better than men’s blades for men who shave irregularly.

Razor blades made for men are oriented towards permanently clean-shaven guys who shave every day.

Women’s razors, on the other hand, have blades at a steeper angle and have more space between blades (on a three-blade Wilkinson Sword, for example).

Women’s razors are made for cutting longer bristles, since women tend to shave their legs less frequently.

For men this means that they clog less and cut a three-day growth more easily.

The only question is: are you comfortable using a pastel pink or green razor blade?

Friday, October 17, 2008

what’s quantum?

I’ve frequently been hearing the word quantum, and of course, the new James Bond just came out, Quantum of Solace.

Coincidentally, I recently bought the collected James Bond short stories by Ian Fleming (most of which I’d never suspected the existence), and one of them is also entitled Quantum of Solace.

The story has nothing to do with the film—the stories just supply the new film titles.

I realized that I had no idea what quantum means, so I looked it up.

Quantum (n, plural quanta): the smallest discrete amount of any quantity.

Quantum (adj): significant (frequently used to describe a change).

In addition, there are several meanings that apply to specific scientific theories or contexts.

sources:
members.tripod.com/l_asproni/Atom/atom_glossary.htm
www4.nau.edu/meteorite/Meteorite/Book-GlossaryQ.html
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/quantum

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

opportunity cost and overwhelm

Opportunity Cost & Overwhelm

I have frequently had the experience of being somewhere interesting, but mysteriously not being able to enjoy myself.

As an example, I will use the fêtes in Bayonne, in southwest France. It’s a big party, with lots of stuff going on and more than 100,000 people in the street. It’s a little like Mardi Gras.

During these fêtes, there are hundreds of private parties spilling into the streets, there are bands (rock and brass or both) playing in the streets, there are interesting people to talk to, and more.

What tends to happen to me is that I get there, and it’s obviously a great occasion. There are inifinite possibilities, but somehow I find myself being glum and not getting into the vibe.

The reason is that there is so much cool stuff going on that I am eternally convinced that something better is happening somewhere else. The opportunity cost of doing ANYTHING AT ALL is too high, and so I slump into a sort of zombie-like trance where I can’t commit to enjoying the moment.

Here’s a different example. I remember from the 70’s a situation where kids would have five minutes to take whatever they wanted from a toy store. I remember thinking that it would be a nightmare, because whatever you could take, you would regret not having taken something else.

Again, the opportunity cost of acting is so high that I would have become paralyzed.

Clearly, everyone doesn’t have the same relationship to these situations. During the fêtes, plenty of people are content to hang out at one street corner for five straight days. The kids who got to pillage the toy store seemed pretty happy.

My personal opportunity cost is frequently so high that it prevents me from choosing anything at all. Why is that? I believe that it comes from a childhood experience of a particular kind of poverty, where there were no second chances.

The minute I think “okay, I’m going to start playing guitar,” I start hearing voices saying “but you really wanted to draw, and it’s more important.”

The minute I start drawing, I hear voices saying “you’re going to play in a concert Wednesday, and you’d be better off practicing guitar.”

This sort of opportunity-cost paralysis comes from an articial belief that there is not enough time to do everything.

A basic lack of faith in “things will work out.”

This is an inconclusive post, and I have to admit that although I can see the problem, I am unable to see a solution or way forward.

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

opportunity cost and addiction

Opportunity Cost & Addiction

It is interesting to consider the concept of opportunity cost in addiction. What we are looking for is a way to describe the moment that the addict (who would like to stop using) caves in and decides to once again take his drug.

The junky shoots up when the opportunity cost of taking the drug becomes low enough.

Here is a scenario:

Week 1: J (the junky) gets out of rehab. He is full of optimism, and has a new lease on life. He goes home and cleans his apartment, and starts his new job (thanks to a government program for helping addicts get a new start).

At this time, the opportunity cost of using is far too high, and J does not seriously consider shooting up.

Week 2: things are going a little less smoothly. His job is tiring, and J has not consistantly done the dishes or put things away.

J’s apartment is getting a little messy. It turns out that J’s new boss has a tendency to micromanage. J’s girlfriend has a lot of ideas about how he should do things differently, and although J tries to go along, it’s a lot of work and he doesn’t always agree.

J starts to think about shooting up, how nice it would be. He really wants things to work out, to stay on the wagon, but boy is it frustrating. His quality of life is significantly lower than it was during week 1, and the opportunity cost of using (losing most of what he has) has dropped significantly.

Week 3: J really wants things to work out. He’s doing his best to make his boss happy and implement all of his girfriend’s ideas. That doesn’t really leave him with a lot of energy for himself, and his apartment is slowly turning into a catastrophe. No matterwhat he does, he doesn’t feel like his boss will really like him.

J feels guilty that he’s not doing better at keeping those people around him happy.

At this point J has invested a significant amount of energy in the people around him. Everyone knows that junkies are selfish, and J is trying really hard to be selfless. It just doesn’t seem to be working out. He doesn’t have enough energy, and he can’t seem to satisfy everyone. He’s stopped taking care of himself in order to be good to other people.

You can see where we are going with this. The more that J tries to “be good” and “help others” the faster his life spirals downward. The lower his quality of life, the lower the cost of opportunity of using.

There comes a moment when J thinks: ah fuck, it’s not worth it. I tried everything, and I can’t win. My life is shit anyway, so I might as well shoot up and feel good for a few minutes.

It is obvious from this example that although he was trying to be good, everything J did lead to a decreased opportunity cost for using. When the opportunity cost was low enough, J shot up.

Imagine another scenario where J gets out of rehab, and instead of trying to “be good”, he just tries to have a good life. He takes a vacation in the caribbean, starts working out, learns to draw, learns to cook, decides not to take the advice of his girlfriend just because he doesn’t feel like it. Etc. etc.

The quality of J’s life goes up consistently. The opportunity cost of using drugs also goes up, and as time goes by J is less and less tempted (although he never was really tempted once he got out of rehab).

The important thing here is that even by trying to do right for everyone else, the junky can dig his own grave by lowering the opportunity cost of his drug by not taking care of himself.

Only by increasing his OWN quality of life can the junky increase the opportunity cost of using. Only by doing things that make HIMSELF happy.

Friday, August 15, 2008

opportunity cost and web design

One way to think of Opportunity Cost is as “losing interest”. When the Opportunity Cost of an activity becomes too high, you loses interest; you start to feel that you are wasting time.

This idea is useful in understanding web site design. A site that is beautifully designed but which is too slow or complicated to use has a high opportunity cost—the user starts to feel that he or she could be doing better elsewhere.

It is therefore extremely important in designing a web site that the user experience feel concentrated and useful, keeping the opportunity cost as low as possible.

If the reason for the user’s visit is to get something done, anything that slows him or her down raises the opportunity cost. This is true regardless of how beautiful or interesting the site is by other criteria.

Saturday, June 21, 2008

expensive plates

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062100149.html

“The next time you sit down for a nice meal at your favorite dining spot, take a close look at the prices of entrees. More often than not, there are one or two really expensive items, and then there are a bunch of mid-level ones and then there are a few inexpensive ones.

“The reason those really expensive items are there—say, $50 for a seafood platter—is that they are the reference point. You will consider them, then perhaps consider them too expensive, but instead of trading all the way down for the cheapest options ($19), you will likely settle at the middle ($30), thinking you got a deal relative to the pricey entree.

The important part here the idea of anchoring—establishing a high reference price (the original iPhone) and then offering reduced price choices.

Without the initial high-priced offering (that may never be bought), the reduced-price choice would have seemed expensive.

Since many people will intentionally choose the middle of a given price range in order to be “reasonable”, we can push this middle range up considerably by artifically offering higher-priced merchandise.