Thursday 21 July 2011
-
Filed under
Bookmarks
These are my links for June 22nd through July 19th:
- CoffeeTable – Code – Alec Perkins – A drop-in workbench for experimentation, CoffeeTable provides a CoffeeScript-fluent console on a page, with persistent history and auto-suggest.
- Waterloo – Jobs – Google – Google opened an office a mile from my old high school. That neighborhood was all closed shoe and tire factories.
- The Observation Deck » In defense of intrapreneurialism – RT @bcantrill: In defense of intrapreneurialism: And curse you @trevoro for having taunted me with that red cape!
- matt blags – hivemind devops alert: nginx sucks at ssl – Benchmark of SSL handling by nginx, stunnel, stud, and the author's patched stud.
- smoke.js – "A framework-agnostic styled alert system for javascript. Lightweight, flexible, css3 animation, blah blah blah easy to use…"
- Eli Bendersky’s website » Blog Archive » Parsing C++ in Python with Clang – RT @tuan_kuranes_rs: Parsing C++ in Python with Clang:
- Lunch: The Patty Shack, Redwood City, CA | blueslugs.com – Bacon-wrapped hot dogs arrive in #redwoodcity.
- Jonas Galvez: HCSS – hcss is a CSS compiler that that allows you to use HTML element hierarchy to define CSS rules. hcss employs simple conventions for defining nested rules and minimalist class inheritance.
- Adam Leventhal’s blog » Flash news I wish I could read – RT @ahl: new blog post » Flash news I wish I could read
- Traffic Light Protocol – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia – "The Traffic Light Protocol (TLP) was created[1][2] to encourage greater sharing of sensitive information. The originator signals how widely they want their information to be circulated beyond the immediate recipient." A simple document classification scheme.
- How to take advantage of Redis just adding it to your stack – "Redis is different than other database solutions in many ways: it uses memory as main storage support and disk only for persistence, the data model is pretty unique, it is single threaded and so forth. I think that another big difference is that in order to take advantage of Redis in your production environment you don't need to switch to Redis. You can just use it in order to do new things that were not possible before, or in order to fix old problems." Redis's author illustrates some problems Redis makes easy.
- Gephi, an open source graph visualization and manipulation software – "Gephi is an interactive visualization and exploration platform for all kinds of networks and complex systems, dynamic and hierarchical graphs." Java-based, uses OpenGL, cross-platform.
- Dive Into Dojo GFX | Facebook – SitePen's note on dojox.gfx has slightly more detailed examples than the base documentation.
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-07-21 ::
Stephen
Sunday 17 July 2011
-
Filed under
Cooking + House
Dina took the boys out for the afternoon, so I decided to fire up the grill for dinner. The recipes are from Carroll (1999) and Brennan (2002). (The salad is not pictured; I didn’t broil the goat cheese pucks long enough, so plating was a challenge.)
Vinum California Rose for preparation and dinner.
References
Brennan, Georgeanne. Salad: William Sonoma Collection.
(Free Press, 2002).
Carroll, John Phillip. Grilling. Williams-Sonoma Kitchen Library. (Time Life Medical, 1992).
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-07-17 ::
Stephen
Wednesday 6 July 2011
-
Filed under
Observations + Software
A government agency I interact with has updated their web-based client software. The original application was a basic sequence of web forms. Its replacement? An approximately ~50MiB Silverlight-based application. In the process of the update, they discarded my original web account and password. The backend service that the application must communicate with is still slow, operating costs now include the bandwidth to update cached copies (for performance reasons), and the application itself has new usability issues. Because of the switch from standardized Web technologies to Silverlight, the majority of their customers can’t run the application on their phone or tablet. (If it were Flash, iPads would still be excluded.) How was this change an upgrade, again?
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-07-06 ::
Stephen
Monday 4 July 2011
-
Filed under
Cooking + Family + House
We served a light meal for Fourth of July this year–we had only a single dinner guest, and Benjamin is still at camp. The gazpacho and steak recipes were based on those in this month’s Cook’s Illustrated, while the taco filling comes from Bayless’s Authentic Mexican. (The filling is becoming a regular offering at our house.)
Red Stripe and Pacifico served during the preparation phase; a Malbec with dinner. Sorbet for dessert.
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-07-04 ::
Stephen
Saturday 2 July 2011
-
Filed under
Family + Observations + Peninsula
Nathaniel and I, after reading most of the menus on Broadway in search of a hot dog, stopped at The Patty Shack [Yelp] on Main St. Having enjoyed Tijuana Dogs at Fremont’s now-defunct Juan More Taco, I was pretty excited to have a local source for bacon-wrapped hot dogs. Nathaniel enjoyed his corn dog; he’s torn between the Shack’s better product versus Ben Franks’s location beside the train tracks at Whipple.
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-07-02 ::
Stephen
Saturday 18 June 2011
-
Filed under
Bookmarks
These are my links for May 24th through June 18th:
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-06-18 ::
Stephen
Saturday 21 May 2011
-
Filed under
Consumer + Observations
The number of sites asking me to take a brief survey has exploded in the
past six months. I’m also seeing email and paper mail requests to
participate in surveys creep up too. If this increase is an indicator
of an improving economy—as we interpret the worsening traffic on
US101—that’s great, but it doesn’t affect my goal, which is to
convince you that you should never answer surveys.
There are three reasons I’m trying to persuade you to avoid surveys.
First, after almost a year at a startup, I’m very sensitive to time
wasting activities. Second, I don’t believe survey originators are
valuing that time fairly. Finally, since the survey terms rarely limit use
of the submitted information, I want you to recognize that, in addition
to being undercompensated for the information you shared, you have no
control over how or for what end the information will be used.
We’ll visit each of these in turn, but before that, let me identify two
exceptions where you might choose to submit a survey. Much of my
arguments are going to depend on viewing one or both of the time and
information that the survey involves as having some value. So, if the
survey giver has no ability to compensate you for your time, you might
choose to view your completion of the survey as a donation. That would
allow you to return surveys to a selection of charities. Similarly, if
you support the survey giving organization’s goals—like a Swedish
car manufacturer with a fine product, but struggling in the
market—you could answer their surveys in the hope that the value
of the information you shared incrementally helps them to reach their
goals. (Acting on a survey request being substantially less investment
than purchasing a car.) A shareholder of a company that is surveyed by
that same company might choose to answer in the hopes of seeing their
investment succeed.
If the survey organization doesn’t fit into those categories, it’s very
likely that you shouldn’t respond. Let’s see why.
“I recommend to you to take care of minutes: for hours will take care
of themselves.” – Earl of Chesterfield
The first concern is that surveys require time, and return no
information. Just the request, as a rejected dialogue on a web page or
an email to be deleted, has already cost a minute. Typical surveys run
from 3 – 5 minutes to 30 minutes or more, plus that initial minute of
interruption. What do we receive for that minute? Presumably the
survey giver now knows more about us, and can adjust their products or
pricing to be more appealing to those people who answered the survey
identically. We receive nothing—not even information shared by
other respondents, so that we might get some comparative demographics
about our fellow customers.
I think we would all get sensitized to a stream of requests for work
(the surveys) for which we got nothing back. Eventually, even the most
accommodating personality would just refuse. They might even slam down
the telephone, or press the delete key really hard. That’s why surveys often
offer to enter submitters into a draw for one or more prizes; this
tactic is meant to suggest that you are being compensated for your
effort.
Before we analyze a specific survey request, let’s establish a useful
baseline for comparison. Minimum wage in California since 2008 is
$8/hr, which corresponds to $16,000 annually. The survey requests all
claim to need only minutes of our time, so a more natural unit is a
minute of compensation. For the California, the minimum per-minute wage
is $0.13.
I just received a survey offer today. It’s from a for-profit company,
whose goals aren’t of particular interest to me. That means it’s a
convenient example to evaluate. The survey claims to require 3 minutes for
a chance at $2500. (We’ll omit the minute we lost reading the offer; it
makes the numbers worse.) To determine whether or not the survey’s
compensation is worthwhile, we will compare the minimum wage for 3
minutes:
$$
3\,\rm{minutes} \times \$0.13\,/\,\rm{minutes} = $0.39
$$
against the expectation value of the lottery draw. The expectation
value, written ⟨value⟩, is defined as the sum over
all of the outcome values multiplied by the probability that each
particular outcome occurs. Since, when we lose, the outcome value is 0,
the only contributing term is when we win:
$$
\langle \rm{value} \rangle = \rm{value} \times P [\rm{we\ win\ lottery}]
$$
The value of the prize is $2500. To determine the probability, we
assume each respondent has an equal chance to win. Then we are left to
estimate the likely number of respondents to the survey. If each
respondent has an equal chance, then the probability is
$$
P[\rm{we\ win\ lottery}] = {1 \over \rm{number\ of\ respondents}}
$$
The company in question, after a brief search, had 3 – 4 million
customers in a recent report. If we assume they sampled 1% of their
customers, that’s a pool of 30,000 – 40,000 potential respondents.
If 1000 people respond, our expectation value is $2.50; if 10,000 people
respond, our expectation value is $0.25, less than our minimal
compensation. (The expectation value is equal when 6,410 people
respond.)
So, for a reasonable assumption about number of respondents, we see that
the expectation value of the prize is in the vicinity of the minimum
wage for the time contributed. If our example company sampled a larger
set, then it’s very likely the expectation value will be less than
minimum wage; if you value your time substantially higher than
minimum wage, the expectation value of the prize will not be compensating. Thus, in
most cases, when you submitted your survey, you received neither useful
information nor compensating value.
(Before moving on, we should flip our perspective: how did the surveying
company value the information submitted and the impact on customer time?
There’s the amount of the prize. We could divide that amount by the
number of respondents, and see the valuation above; we might divide by
the number of invitations, which is substantially lower. If data
acquisition costs only a few cents per customer, is it likely that the
data will be valued more highly in a strategic discussion?)
The last reason to avoid submitting surveys is that you are sharing
information about yourself, or your household, with an organization into
which you likely have limited insight. Beyond whether or not the data
you submitted in your response has a meaningful impact on the company’s
decisions, there are questions about the use of that data after its
initial analysis. Some surveys say they won’t share your email or
contact information, or explicitly ask for permissions around contact;
in the bulk of these, though, no limitations are placed on the use of
the submitted data. That’s worrying, but abstract.
The more concrete concern is that your information will be used by the
company for goals other than the product improvement ones we’ve assumed
above. Your information might be used to assess your ability to
contribute to a political campaign, or to determine the compensation
rates of your employer. Your disclosure of a preference for
Scandinavian automobiles to your bank might be eventually shared with a domestic or
foreign car manufacturer, who would rather you didn’t hold such a preference.
Since there is no agreement on how the information can be used, you
should expect that some of the survey data you submitted has been
shared, or sold, and has circulated wildly. Why continue to refresh it?
Responding to surveys is a flawed activity in three ways: you receive
no information in return for the information you submitted, you receive
inadequate compensation for the time taken, and you have no assurance or
control over the use of the information over any period of time.
I suppose, as we look at those three concerns, that an idealized
survey can be described as
- a survey that includes a simple summary of the responses to each question, returned within a reasonable time following the survey period,
- a survey with guaranteed payment in some useful form, in an amount that reflects the value of the responder’s time and the giver’s use of the information, and
- a survey that covers the use and retention of the submitted information with a actual, easily understood license.
If you receive a survey with those characteristics, I suppose you might
consider submitting it. Otherwise, you should stop.
1 comment ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-05-21 ::
Stephen
Friday 20 May 2011
-
Filed under
Bookmarks
These are my links for May 9th through May 20th:
- Cool, but obscure unix tools :: KKovacs – "Just a list of 20 (now 28) little-known tools for the command line." Nice presentation; a few are new to me.
- [1105.1383] Topological Considerations for Tuning and Fingering Stringed Instruments – We present a formal language for assigning pitches to strings for fingered multi-string instruments, particularly the six-string guitar. Given the instrument's tuning (the strings' open pitches) and the compass of the fingers of the hand stopping the strings, the formalism yields a framework for simultaneously optimizing three things: the mapping of pitches to strings, the choice of instrument tuning, and the key of the composition. Final optimization relies on heuristics idiomatic to the tuning, the particular musical style, and the performer's proficiency.
- Tweetable Sparkblocks – The Data Collective – Form to generate a sparkline bar graph that's capable of being Tweeted (and presumable pasted many places).
- Blogofile – Blogofile is a static website compiler, primarily (though not exclusively) designed to be a simple blogging engine. It requires no database and no special hosting environment. You customize a set of templates with Mako, create posts in a markup language of your choice (see Post Content) and Blogofile renders your entire website as static HTML and Atom/RSS feeds which you can then upload to any old web server you like.
- Twitpic – Share photos and videos on Twitter – Why I am changing a flat tire. #nail
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-05-20 ::
Stephen
Thursday 5 May 2011
-
Filed under
Bookmarks
These are my links for April 25th through May 5th:
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-05-05 ::
Stephen
Friday 29 April 2011
-
Filed under
City
Our considerate server brought us tastes of two distinct wines to assist our selection. Note that Zero Zero doesn’t open for lunch until 12 p.m. If you arrive before your tablemates, LuLu next door has a bar; in spring, their special cocktails use fresh basil.
Comments Off ::
Share or discuss
::
2011-04-29 ::
Stephen