Social Commentary | Darren He

July 31, 2009

Seoul after Two Weeks

The Good:

1) Tasty food and desserts
2) Advanced telecommunications network
3) Lots of stores and shopping options
4) Effective public transportation system

The Bad:

1) Lack of healthy food options, particularly when eating out
2) Most gyms lack a lot of basic equipment
3) Rude, reckless drivers
4) Bad pollution
5) Deceptive business practices.

Post/View Comments

Subscribe - RSS Feed

March 2, 2009

February 17, 2009

The Singer Solution to World Poverty (circa 1999)

Filed under: College, Politics, Social Commentary — 6:15 PM

“A” pointed me out to this article by Peter Singer. I’d link “A” here, but she doesnt have a blog, website, etc. The article describes some moral ponderings, not at all unlike the standard examples from Professor Sandel’s Justice class here at Harvard. Does Bob divert a train to save a child at the expense of a new Bugatti he saved up years for?

The difference is the extension to charity? Do you skip an expensive dinner ($200) so that you can help one malnourished child become healthy? When do you stop? At $1000? At one-fifth of your income? Or do you wait until you’re a billionaire and then make headlines by donating all of your money?

I agree with many of Singer’s points, but I think it takes a rather one-sided view of the entire situation. Won’t Bob’s incentive to work extra or harder be diminished if he knows all the money is going to charity? Does throwing money at charities really solve the original problem? What do you think?

Post/View Comments

Subscribe - RSS Feed

February 15, 2009

The Death Breath (Moan) of Newspapers

My younger brother, quite accomplished for a 17-year-old, is an intern at the Signal, the local newspaper of my California hometown area. His words to me were, “What do you know about social networking?” And now in a typical Web 2.0 format (GChat Archive + my slow responses):

11:44 PM me: it’s big

E: hopefully

i may develop something like that for the signal

using digg or something

11:46 PM me: what do you mean?

facebook for the newspaper?

E: something like that

12:23 AM me: i still dont understand how it will work

what will get ppl to use it?

or is it an internal thing?

12:26 AM E: dunno yet

well what will get people to read the signal?

12:27 AM given circulation <16k

My answer at the time was simply “good journalism.” I reasoned that despite the decreased interest in paper newspaper, the Signal could boost its online and paper readership with better writing rather than features and gimmicks. But after thinking about it more carefully, I realized that this might not be the case. Many people are on the computer with the primary purpose of enjoyment: reading “good writings” comes in as a secondary goal. While I can’t imagine why I’d join in a small, newspaper-run social network when I’ve already spread my social webs all over the place with Facebook, Twitter, and my blog, I do think that newspapers need to do something drastic to “survive.”

I put “survive” in quotes, however, because to survive implies that there is or was a risk of death. And to be at risk of death from a Darwinian/evolutionary standpoint means there is a failure to adapt and change. For newspaper executives to say that their industry is dying is to admit that they are helpless to change the machinations of a large but oh=so-last-century phenomenon. This does not have to be the case.

Yahoo! News ran an article today [link] on “wanted ’survival strategies’ for dying US newspapers.” The possible solutions include micropayments, hyperlocal news, and philanthropic schemes. Steven Outing calls for “voluntary monthly payments.” T.J. Sullivan calls for newspapers to go on a strike of sorts – shutting down online services to non-paying subscribers and letting people see what it would be like.

Epic fail, as Gen Y would say. These pundits and executives sitting around arguing about how to “survive” are as antiquated as their paper newspapers. For sure, they have the management know-how and business experience that they could only accumulate over many years of work. I am sure that if I tried to run a newspaper, I too would end in “epic fail”.

But this does not obscure their problem, or the problems with their solutions. Let’s look at some of them.

Micropayments: Not even close to a good idea. Do these executives realize how annoying it is to send payments on the internet, even with streamlined services such as PayPal and Google Shopping? I’d have to enter my credit card number and billing address to yet another website. I’d have to log in everytime I used the internet and send my financial information more than I’d like, even if there was a system that collected lump sums rather than individual payments. Reading the news on unsecure public computers is out of the question. And what about inspiring and educating the future generations? Severe limits – Jimmy has to go ask Daddy for his credit card number every time he wants to read the news from a different source.
Hyperlocal News: The Internet is already overcrowded with information. While all news must be taken with a grain of salt, hyperlocal websites must be taken with a cup of it. There is always an element of reputability that comes with mainstream news sources. Even if it were name-branded “New York Times Cambridge Massachusetts Select Local,” I’d think twice about reading it. And by the time I was on the second “think,” I’d be another bounce statistic on their website analytics.
Philanthropic Schemes: This does not represent a sound business plan on a large scale. It is true, Wikipedia receives a lot of user donations. But that is because it is representative and near-synonymous with free-speech and user contributions. People pay because they feel strongly about the cause and their right to participate, not because it is the best source of information.
Steven Outing’s Voluntary Payments: Good for small and medium sized online communities of dedicated individuals.. Not feasible for a large-scale, mainstream corporation. Just as I mentioned above in “Philanthropic Schemes,” this idea is noble but not a sound business plan. How many stores besides the thrift-marts do you see that advertise, “Name Your Own Price?” They’d be out of inventory in seconds and out of business soon afterwarsd, particularly in a down economy.
T.J. Sullivan’s Newspaper Corporation-Led Strike / Black Out: This is the most ridiculous idea I have heard to date. While I respect Sullivan’s journalism, this idea is simply ludicrous. Strikes are effective when they are led by the people, not by the corporations! When all the newspapers going on their “black out,” their strike-breaking competitors will see their traffic and Alexa rankings skyrocket! Consumers will be left with distaste, distrust, and a desire to never return to those “greedy business executives.”
Licensing Model, like Cable TV or Radio: Nice try, but still based off something decades-old. Whether the aggregator or the reporter gets the ad income does not matter from the point of view that the income must ultimately come from the consumer. Yes, you can print ads everywhere and collect my information, but you can’t block out my favorite TV channel or radio station. I have the power to click away. Honestly, I hardly see ads anymore. My Internet-trained eye automatically marginalized them. Try subliminal messaging instead.

What then, is my idea for profitability? I’m not sure – I’m an outsider, a bystander. I can witness an accident and tragedy about to occur, but that does not mean I can intervene.

However, I do know that it is not time for a newspaper bailout. Sympathy does not work in capitalism: look at our current bail-out fiascos. It is time to let the old style of newspapers and their corporations die. Good journalism will persevere, but not in the business format that it currently struggles in. Someone needs to rebuild the online news industry from the ground-up, rather than trying to bridge an old-style into the 21st century. Online news must be self-sustaining and reputable, with substantial user input. People don’t simply want to hear, they want to ask, to write – to join in. Why else would people like me blog for the public? I could just write in a private electronic diary otherwise.

Rather, the keywords to look out for are user-based, editor-filtered, free, reputable, and excellence. So many people are vying for my attention – dozens of online newspapers, fellow bloggers, nonprofit organizations, and for-profit businesses. You, Mr. Newspaper Owner, are not an AUTHORITY but a PEER, whom I rate with an extra star or two because of your journalistic training and track record. The Internet is about the power of the people, and you are free to try to make money off of it, but attempting to do so by taking that power away will either lead to 1) EPIC FAIL or 2) a worse-off world.

I am a supporter of businesses, and I hope that honest, reputable news finds a solid foundation for success in the online world. If I knew the answer, I’d have a Top 10 blog right now. If only.

Post/View Comments

Subscribe - RSS Feed

February 13, 2009

Claire Suddath’s 25 Things (Time Magazine)

Claire Suddath’s article on 25 Things I Didn’t Want to Know About You, as I mentioned in a previous post, was satirizing the ridiculousness of the 25 Things Facebook trend. Rather than driving sense into people and the trend into oblivion, Suddath most likely raised its profile – indeed, someone actually found my blog from a Google search for “claire suddath 25.

It reminds me of the time a hostage’s life was being determined based on the amount of website traffic. I forget the exact details, or whether the story was even true, but the victim’s survival basically depended on people not visiting a certain website.

What happens next? Of course, the story is all over the TV and popular news channels. Poor guy, I hope it was a false story. Shame on you, journalists who report on something bad only to raise your own profiles!

Post/View Comments

Subscribe - RSS Feed

February 6, 2009

25 Random Things About Me

Filed under: Blog Stuff, College, Social Commentary — 3:14 AM

First, I got the invitation. Someone had written 25 notes about themselves on Facebook and tagged me. I was supposed to write another one and tag more people. I decided to pass on it.

Then, I read my brother’s blog. He had done it too.

Finally, I saw an awesome Times Magazine article by Claire Suddath, 25 Things I Didn’t Want to Know About You. Apparently in one week’s time, 5 million of these posts had been made – 125 random things – and at 10 minutes a set, 800,000 hours of productivity had been lost. Granted, a lot of these notes were written by children, but it still doesn’t quite meet Obama’s call for “working harder.”

I was about to do it on Facebook, but why not on the blogging world? (I’m sure someone else has been done it, but I consider it a new idea in my head at least).

I’m going to write 25 random facts about myself and write a comment on another blog. The victim must write 25 random facts on their own blog and “pass-it-on” to another blog lest he/she is struck by lightning/loses their true love/gets hit by a bus/stubs their toe/etc!

Here goes my list:

I have 3 bottles of contact solution.
I carry my cell phone in my left pocket, my keys in my right pocket, and my wallet in my back pocket.
I poured water out the window onto passing bystanders from my third-floor freshman dorm room. Then giggled as I ducked out of sight.
I have a starlight ladybug that projects constellations onto my ceiling.
I lose a bicycle helmet every 3 months, on average.
I now have a pink bicycle helmet. Pink men’s items generally go on sale earlier.
I once attempted to use a homeless man’s cup for basketball practice. He was a well-to-do homeless man, though, with a new leather jacket and Timberland boots. That, or I was conned.
I have never seen the Titanic before. People have differing responses to that statement.
One of these 25 facts is a lie.
I once had 20 pet goldfish. They all died.
I flushed at least one of my dead goldfish down the toilet.
Fish is one of my favorite meats.
I secretly fear that the Power Button on my computer monitor will break, rendering it useless.
The servers at the Hong Kong Restaurant know me by sight, greet me, and know what I am going to order.
I purposely change my order at the Hong Kong Restaurant to confuse the servers.
I have a box full of unused Christmas bows because I made the mistake of buying from Costco.
My favorite dining hall food is Cappuccino frozen yogurt.
I am very good at estimating the caloric contents of food.
I have a poster on my door that reads, “NO FARTING.”
I am considering getting an M.P.H. I just need a school to consider me.
I got some boxers autographed by Paris Hilton. I hope she has another scandal so I can auction them on eBay.
I once pretended to be a saber tooth tiger and jumped off a futon to attack someone.
I don’t have a favorite color.
I dream of jumping across the subway tracks from platform to platform in a kung-fu movie.
I just realized that Facebook Notes is a lot more efficient way of doing this than weblog comments.

Post/View Comments

Subscribe - RSS Feed

February 4, 2009

Walk Slow, Run Fast

Introduction

I’ve had to walk around quickly today, and it’s made me unhappy. I’m a rather slow walker – a leisure walker – to the point that people walking with me sometimes complain. Yet when I go running, no one wants to come along, even if I offer to jog at a slower pace. I’ve even seen Facebook groups decrying slow walkers – but more often than not, the people that walk quickly run slowly or even not at all.

I’ve thus decided that there are four main categories of people, outlined in this chart below.

Run Walk Categories

People in Category 3 and 4 are special cases, to be discussed later or never. In this post, I will compare Category 1 and Category 2 individuals. I will break this issue down into efficiency, time, attractiveness, and personal satisfaction.

Efficiency

Walking and running have different rates of efficiency. At slower speeds, walking is more efficient and at higher speeds, running is more efficient. This happens because walking and running have different methods of conservation of energy and momentum. Walking has potential energy and kinetic energy out of phase, and running has them in phase. To save time and boredom, think of walking like a pendulum and running like a spring. We can then compare power-walking to this following chart of the energy efficiency of walking and running, drawn from Life Sciences 2:

Run and Walk Efficiencies

At approximately 2 meters/second, running becomes more energetically efficient than walking. This converts to 4.47 miles per hour. From a less academic source, Wikipedia states that power-walking is between 4.5 to 5.5 miles per hour. This means that power-walkers are walking at a time when running would be more energetically efficient.

Thus we have a win for Category 2 (walk slow, run fast) – but what about the other aspects of this debate?

Walk Slow, Run Fast: 1

Walk Fast, Run Slow: 0

Time

Now how about time savings? It is true that if you are only looking at walking, then walking faster saves more time than walking slowly. But we must also consider the running part. Since you rarely see people running in their thick wool coats, we will consider running in terms of exercise.

Let’s first assume that we walk from Leverett House to the Science Center, round-trip, two times a day. The total distance traveled is 2.4 miles (0.6 miles x 4).

Walking to Class (0.6 miles)

If a power-walker speeds to class and back at a rate of 5 miles per hour (average power-walking speed), and a slow walker travels at merely 3 miles per hour, we can calculate that a power-walker spends 28 minutes, 48 seconds walking to class. The slow walker takes 48 minutes. The difference is 19 minutes, 12 seconds.

Now let’s say that both the power-walker and the slow walker hear from the popular media that exercising off or reducing consumption of food by 500 calories a day will lead to one pound of fat loss per week. While we must control for the increased speed of both individuals due to weight loss, let us assume that their diet plans are failures and despite their exercise, they maintain the same weight. The slow walker is now the fast runner, and maintains a brisk clip: a 6 minute mile. On the other hand, the power-walker is now the slow runner, and can only do 10 minute miles.

We can calculate calories according to my guide from an earlier blog post (http://darrenhe.com/blog/?p=71) using the Compendium of Physical Activities Tracking Guide [link]. Running a 6 minute mile (10 mph) has a METS of 16.0. With a weight of 70 kg (154 lbs), burning 500 calories requires 26 minutes, 47 seconds. On the other hand, running a 10 minute mile (6 mph) has a METS of 10.0. At the same weight, burning 500 calories requires 42 minutes, 51 seconds. The difference here is 16 minutes, 4 seconds.

The power-walker thus saves 3 minutes, 8 seconds after combining the time differences for walking to and from class with exercise time. However, in the course of a day, 3 minutes is insignificant. Furthermore, that depends on the weight of the individual and the number of calories desired. At a lower weight, running faster saves even more time; also, burning more than 500 calories will also tip the scales towards fast-running time savings.

I’ll have to call this one a tie, because the difference is very small and the margin of error is large. Let’s move on.

Walk Slow, Run Fast: 1.5

Walk Fast, Run Slow: 0.5

Attractiveness

What is more attractive, category 1 or category 2? This is a strictly personal preference, but there are some general social norms that we can look at. Let’s group this again by walking and running.

Walking: Walking quickly gives the impression that you are busy, important, and “going-somewhere.” You know the city you live in and you have no hesitation. Walking slowly, on the other hand, is characteristic of tourists, which tends to be frowned upon. However, walking slowly is also a characteristic of “cool” in urban America.

Running: Running quickly is hands-down more attractive than running slowly. Whenever I see a slow runner scrape by, involuntary twitches ripple across my face and I think, “Why even bother?”

Runner

Whether we rule this as a win for Category 1 or Category 2 is up to personal discretion. But since I live in Cambridge/Boston, being urbane is much more important than being “gangsta-cool.” Thus we have another tie.

Walk Slow, Run Fast: 2

Walk Fast, Run Slow: 1

Personal Satisfaction

What is more satisfactory? Let’s consider it case-by-case:

Walk Slow/Run Fast: Double satisfaction. The phrase “stop and smell the roses” is no longer applicable when you walk so slowly that the roses wilt while you walk by. You have time to say hello to your friends, listen-in on private conversations, and slow down traffic as a bumbling bystander. And when you go running, you feel the refreshing breeze across your body, wicking away your sweat. Your heart rate is higher, and you get that feeling of accomplishment after your run.

Walk Fast/Run Slow: Double failure. You accidentally walk by your friends without saying hello, you have to read about accidents that happened right next to you in the news, and you have to bump and jostle the homeless men as you scurry past them. Then when you go for a slow jog, sweat drips onto your arms and people look at you funny. No good.

Roses

Clear win for Category 2 (Walk Slow/Run Fast).

Walk Slow, Run Fast: 3

Walk Fast, Run Slow: 1

Conclusion

Walking slowly but running quickly is clearly superior than walking quickly and running slowly. Not only are you more energetically efficient, you are happier and will live a longer life (citation needed). While time savings and attractiveness of either option come in at a tie, Category 2 is still the overall winner. Thus I encourage you to slow down and smell the roses on the walk to class, and toast the other runners on your daily jog.

Winner!

Post/View Comments

Subscribe - RSS Feed

January 28, 2009

Lamps, Part I

Filed under: Fashion, Social Commentary — 8:28 PM

I went through first semester of my senior year without a lamp – my previous one was broken and I’ve long given up on building management’s ability to fulfill my needs. (Missing standing lamp, creaking pipes, wheezing heating, etc.). Instead, I’ve been either using my computer – as both a light source as well as a word processor.

The lack of a lamp finally bothered me enough that I began looking for one. Katherine solved this problem by getting me a lamp, image below:

Verilux Modern Deluxe Full Spectrum Lamp, Brushed Steel

I now have the Verilux Modern Deluxe Full Spectrum Lamp in Brushed Steel. Not only is it an attractive, well constructed lamp, but it also provides a full range of visible light that supposedly enhances your wakefulness and ability to see. I was never too much of a lamp snob, but this one works great.

My main question, though, is “why are lamps so expensive?” A lamp is a rather simple piece of technology – a power source connected to a light with a switch. I remember my dad showing me how to make simple electric circuits, and they were as a capable as a lamp, albeit with a smaller power supply and light source. There are even how-to guides for homemade lamps, such as: HowStuffWorks Lamp Guide.

Those people familiar with the Boston area have probably seen the upscale lamp store Neena’s – their brightly lit stores are filled with all shapes and sizes of lamps, generally in the triple-digit dollar range but sometimes in the thousands. An example is the Bolo Table Lamp, shown below.

BOLO table, $590 $470 (on sale)

The most expensive lamp ever sold was the Tiffany Lotus Lamp, which fetched $2.8 million.

Tiffany Lotus Lamp, $2,807,500

It’s not that I don’t understand why the prices are so high – lamps are a functional as well as aesthetic piece of furniture art, and for the same reason that handbags and shoes fetch thousands of dollars, lamps cost as much or more. They probably last longer and stay fashionable for longer than clothing and accessories as well. But as a student who just needs a table lamp for light…geez.

Best of all, however, is the rip-off Tiffany Lotus Lamp, available at your local Sam’s Club for under $130: