John Robb's Weblog

I totally agree how cool this is. I was having a conversation with someone the other day... basically THE requirement for the next step of the web is to take all the crappy data that's out there and make it structured. To the extent that RSS provides a nice and easy way to do that, I think it'll really advance things. Whether or not Siebel or SAP decides to RSS enable their huge databases or someone else needs to write the layer that sits on top is still open. But it's absolutely a great idea... imagine being able to keep two directories or two databases entirely in synch through RSS? I love it!

Bloglines | News

COOOOL! This is the perfect application for RSS... sit back and let the notifications come to you! Of course this won't stop me from hitting refresh a thousand times on my blog reader hoping the package gets here sooner.

Gothamist: Burning Bed Kills Queens Man

Not funny, but very interesting from a resource allocation perspective. A man was burned to death under a burning mattress and the fire engine took 7 minutes to get there. Is that a long time? According to this "Firefighters, Chiefs Respond to Survey on Boston Globe Series - (Firehouse.com News)" the NFPA guidelines are that fire departments must be able to reach 90% of building fires in 6 minutes, only 35% of which actually met the goal in 2002. Ok, so let's say the firehouse that closed down could get the time back to 6 minutes. You could put a firehouse on every street corner and get the time to 1 minute... does that improve the average welfare of your city? It's a bit like planning for the next Tsunami or Meteor... sure you can do it, but it'll cost you and it'll likely have a very rare payoff. The second Mr. Bloomberg started closing firehouses to save money and put that money into other causes, you knew something like this was going to happen at least once. Note, bring this note up when my condo is burning to the ground because the fire engine got to my house in 8 minutes instead of 6.

The New Yorker: Life in the Slow Lane

I love this article... as you may know, I'm a long time fan of understanding traffic; it's such a fascinating system. The article covers exactly how difficult it is to manage the traffic in New York. Why not build more roads? I'm glad you asked! There's an amazing theory called Braess's Paradox which explains that, believe it or not, adding more roads may actually INCREASE average traffic time! Not because more cars are going, but because cars that previously took long roads with low time changes due to congestion now switch to shorter roads where congestion makes things much worse. Click through the link for a detailed explanation but imagine the following:

You have two ways home, each with two sections of road on your way home. One takes 25 minutes + 1 minute for every car on that road for the first section, then 1 minute + 5 minutes for every car on the road for the second section. The second is the exact reverse, with the first section taking 1 minute + 5 minutes for every car on the road, then 25 minutes + 1 minute for every car on the road. It looks a bit like this…



Average length of time to get home for 1 car = 32 minutes
Average length of time to get home for 9 cars = 80 minutes

So the city comes along and puts a short cut in between the two shortest roads, each which only take six minutes… and the short cut is so good it only takes one minute to cover no matter how many cars are on it.



Average length of time to get home for 1 car (taking just the shortest roads) = 12 minutes!

Good times, right? Wrong!

Average length of time to get home for 9 cars (taking just shortest roads) = 92 minutes… ACK!

Though you can end up load balancing for a while, where certain cars continue to take longer routes, it turns out when all the roads reach capacity, it’s likely that you’ve INCREASED the average drive home. This basically results from the fact that you’ve put more load on the less scalable roads where roads that get congested very quickly then can slow drive time even more than if you just took the long way home. Now imagine having to do a calculation like this for NYC where, rather than one or two routes home, you have a BILLION routes home. I’ll leave solving that problem as an exercise for the reader.

But wait, the article gets even better!

Just as the curve of maximum "throughput"—moving as many cars between two points on a road as efficiently as possible—reaches its peak, it abruptly falls off the cliff and is squashed flat against the baseline of the graph.

Traffic engineering is the science of maximizing throughput. What makes traffic jams hard to understand, at least within traditional traffic-engineering practice, is that they tend to occur around the time that the road is performing according to the engineers' peak specification. One important development in understanding this "nonlinear" phenomenon came in 1992, when Kai Nagel and Michael Schreckenberg, two physicists at the University of Cologne, in Germany, began to apply a computational technique known as "cellular automata" (or C.A.) to traffic. In a C.A. model, highway capacity is represented as a two-dimensional grid. Each cell in the grid has one of two "states": empty or occupied by a particle, which in this case is a car. Unlike traditional mathematical models used by traffic engineers, where it is assumed that all drivers are the same, in a C.A. model the particles can be assigned values intended to represent different types of drivers: fast drivers, slow drivers,
tailgaters, and lane changers can all be represented in the model. The result is virtual traffic.

Um, by better of course I mean more geeky. BUT boy is it geeky! I love this... where else can you find a system where one second before it starts failing it's operating at absolutely peak efficiency! And modeling traffic based on different driver agressiveness levels? Yummy! If you're designing SimCity 5, please build this in... I'll be indebted to you forever!

TiVo planning banner ads for when you fast-forward via Engadget and /.

Oh Tivo, why do you hate me? Man, talk about penny-wise/pound-foolish. TV stations are just going to have to get used to the fact that users will not sit for commercials any more. Hey, I have an idea, get off your ass and figure out a new business model! Or pull television shows because you cannot afford them! Let the market decide instead of trying to staple on old methods on the new implementation. Ugh.

What Happens Once the Oil Runs Out? via John Robb's Weblog

What a really interesting article about oil production. Mr. Deffeyes (who knows more about oil production than nearly anyone) predicts Hubbert's peak around late 2006. Even drilling in ANWR (which is predicted to be half the size of the Prudhoe Bay field) will not stop the decline, especially in that even if they start drilling today, it will not pay off for another four years. My primary question is not around what we will drive when oil becomes too expensive to power cars; I feel like the auto industry is already on a path to develop non petroleum-based vehicles, and the increase in the price of oil will only speed that process. The data I do not have is how much oil substitution can occur for non-vehicle uses and what the state of those industries will be. We use plastic for everything, and I am not sure there's a great replacement for oil in its production.

According to this article at the Cato Institute:

Energy Disinformation: "Transportation accounts for 67 percent of petroleum use, but only 27 percent of total energy use. The other third of each barrel of petroleum goes to produce plastics, synthetic fibers, pesticides and fertilizer, fueling farm machinery, generating some electricity and heating some homes. "

They did not list a source, so let's just assume that ~50% of oil is for transportation and ~50% for other uses. Even if we dropped oil for transportation usage to zero instantly, that only doubles the amount of time we have left with oil... it does not extend it forever. I hope the oil industries are smart enough to keep investing in research for when the day comes that the tap runs dry.

The Top 100 Gadgets of All Time via Engadget

Ah the trip down geek memory lane. I was most surprised to come across this little gem...

84. RONCO INSIDE-THE-SHELL EGG SCRAMBLER, 1978 Sick of dirtying forks just to make scrambled eggs? Tired of having to clean out your scramblin' bowl? Get the Ronco Inside-the-Shell Egg Scrambler.

WHY WAS I NOT MADE AWARE OF THIS SOONER! Just think, all those countless countless hours spent cracking shells and mixing eggs. DAMN YOU TECHNOLOGY!

One of the things I'd really like this blog to become is a broad source for all kinds of information. For example, maybe I'll expand into job listings.

Entertainment President at Major Network via Defamer

Opportunity:

Fox Broadcasting Company is searching for a multi-talented, creative and dynamic executive to fill the post of entertainment president.

Responsibilities:

- Provide tepid support for quality shows (i.e. “Arrested Development”), cancel them when marketing says there’s no audience (i.e. “Family Guy”), and then fill the newly open time slot with complete and utter crap (i.e. “Life on a Stick”).
- Figure out a way to air “American Idol” every day of the week, continue administering S&M-style horse whippings to Simon Cowell, and hide corpses of homeless people that Paula Abdul runs over.
- Keep minorities off of “The O.C.”
- Produce string of “Who’s Your Daddy?” follow-ups: “Who’s Your Husband’s Mistress?” “Who’s Your Hijacker?” and “Who’s Your Child’s Molestor?”
- Convince “Mad TV” scribes that audience really thinks they’re funny

Qualifications:
- GED or trade school certification (DeVry or equivalent only please).
- At least ten years experience as a network executive, or demonstrated
ability to wipe own ass.
- Has sacrificed at least one virgin for every year of adulthood.
- References from former superiors that you have slept with, in order to verify
quality of said lay.
- Proven track record of driving assistants to suicide, stabbing friends in back, and
starting every sentence with “I would kill my mother for...”

Interested applicants should apply directly through our jobs web site at http://www.foxcareers.com/

What will I charge for this service? Nothing, of course, it's serving the public that is the ultimate reward.

It's a real shame that the individuals in this case like this have been caught up in the middle of what has become an enormous lightning rod. My feelings (not that they matter to you) is that if someone is in a persistent vegitative state, that's it, wrap it up and go home. You can keep them alive if you want, but that's only for you and not for them. Just so it's in writing, if I'm ever in a state like that (no higher brain function whatsoever), I want my body chopped up and used for gardening. If you want to do something for me, cut off my head and drop it in some liquid nitrogen for some future date when they can bring the dead back to life. But keeping me wrapped up in a hospital does no one any good. This is just me of course, there are a number of choice writings in the 'sphere that have more well-reasoned views which you may enjoy:

Respectful of otters (pt. 1) (subscribed!)
Respectful of otters (pt. 2)
Obsidian Wings (subscribed!)
and Slate

But my favorite, which wraps up many of my feelings about how politicians have been reacting to the case rather than the details of the case itself comes from Scalzi

A reader has asked me what I think of the Terry Schiavo case. Well, naturally, I think that I think it's wonderful that we live in a country where the heads of the House, Senate and the Executive branch feel perfectly at ease using the immense power of the national government to micromanage the medical decisions of a single individual, because of course it's not like there's anything else it needs to be doing at the time.

Mmmm mmm! Chock full of sarcastic biting goodness! Read on for more delicious wit! (Also, subscribed!)

D

Google has no secret plan via slashdot

I really like posts like this. They take a lot of rumor and speculation and distill it down to the common elements that actually make sense. I feel like he's JUST a bit on the conservative side, but basically his premise is this: Google is going to focus on search first and for the most part ignore things that do not directly help in the forwarding of that goal. I think that they will try other markets, but until they figure out a way to charge other than Web Ads, I think they will be pretty limited (I assume subscriptions will be the next step for this; whether or not that's good enough to beat a lot of folks who work on the stuff they're likely to compete with as their primary business (MS Office, MS Windows Sharing, SAP, Oracle, Quicken, etc etc etc) is TBD).

Are people for or against the Bush plan? via Instapundit and Qando

For being such a widely read and well read fellow, Mr. Reynolds seems to be missing what the polled appear to understand (I never thought I'd write THAT sentence). There are two issues with Social Security:

1. Should the government allow individuals to invest in private accounts?
2. Should the government change the structure of Social Security to prevent a short fall in 2018 (or thereabouts) and incomplete coverage in 2042 (or thereabouts)

Note, the two are totally independent of each other! Wait, that’s not ENTIRELY true. What we do with the first MAY affect what we do in the second, but only because it is likely that doing the first will increase the debt load significantly thereby making more difficult our ability to fund Social Security overall and may shorten the amount of time available to do the second. I do not think that anyone in the administration has ever said that private accounts will help avoid the shortfall, and if they have, they are playing fast and loose with the truth. Interestingly, because Mr. Bush appears to be so successful selling the idea that SS is in crisis, and so ineffective at selling the idea that private accounts are the solution, he’s actually hurting himself more than helping himself with his touring about it.

Clock that plays hide and seek via WMMNA (among others)



The alarm clock insanity continues. This one goes off then finds a hiding place. I like how the basic purpose of the alarm clock appears to becoming to annoy you and put itself sufficiently out of reach to force you to track it down. They invented this thing a hojillian years ago... it's called your younger sibling. (Note: Just kidding bro/sis! [Ed: No he's not]). I'm not buying this one however; I'm waiting for the human sized alarm clock which comes up and punches you in the face until you either go into a coma or heave it out the window. I think every morning should begin with some life or death combat, no?

Wow, my brother has a blog and it's good! Go there and see what a true sports fan has to say about stuff, instead of listening to my meaningless ramblings. Now!

D

ESPN Bracket Pages

Well there you go. Is there any thing sweeter to hear than March Madness is here? I may be 'coming down with something’, or 'getting ready to work offsite', or 'not be present', or ‘falsify company sick notices', or 'lie about working on days when I'm actually sitting in front of the TV on my fat ass watching 32 straight games of basketball on CBS uno through ocho thereby stealing from the company which has graciously decided to employ me' (Note: just kidding! [No he's not. -Ed])

Anyhow, I haven't been watching AT ALL this season, which is a distinct change from my life of a few years ago when you could be sure I'd be planted right in front of the tube for Big Monday, Super Tuesday, etc on ESPN. I barely have enough time for the TV I already watch! What do they want from me? My question is do I get to “follow” my perennial team Duke who I have been following for at least 18 years, despite my lack of passionate following in this or any recent season. My brother (smart, funny and generally very nice guy) has long said that as long as you feel the pain of a team’s loss when they lose, they get to be your team. Ok, but what if you don’t feel their pain during the regular season because you haven’t been keeping up?

In addition to these weighty matters, my brother and I got into a discussion about the odds of picking every team. The odds work out as follows:

• Every game = 1 in 9 quintillion (2^63)
• Every game except the 1-16 match ups which you feel are 1-100 shots = 1 in 600 quadrillion (99^4 / (2^59 * 100^4))
• Same as above except you now say that 2-15 and 3-14 match ups are 85% locks = 1 in 8 quadrillion ((99^4 * 85^8 ) / (2^51 * 100^8))
• CA Lottery = 1 in 41 million

Jeez, winning the lottery seems like a piece of cake (comparatively). You’d think that the bookies would take advantage of this. You could offer $1 gets you $1 billion odds on this and make out like a bandit! If it increased betting by an order of magnitude, who cares if you increased the payout by a few orders? No one's going to win it anyway!

There is a mental process which I always go through when picking that always makes me feel weird. I go through and agonize over every pick, whether or not St. Mary’s is going to pull the upset over So. Illinois or which 5 seed is going to lose the 12 seed (it’s always one and usually more). But then the games are played and I make many mistakes and I look at my selections and say “ACK, I was going to pick them, I cannot believe I was so stupid!” But the mind plays around with memory… I bet I was actually not going to pick them. In fact, I bet I was probably super confident of my choice. If this sounds like you, try a little experiment for me. On a separate sheet of paper from your picks, write why you decided to pick each one in a way that allows you to reveal these picks as the games are played, one at a time. You have ~48 hours to do so; that’s plenty of time to write down 63 sentences. Think of it as a little time capsule to yourself in the future. Try and capture what you were thinking, how secure you were in your pick and anything else you’d like to tell the “you” of 48 hours/96 hours/one fortnight more wisdom than you have right now. Then, as each game’s outcome is revealed, uncover the information you wrote to yourself about that game. I guarantee you find the process enlightening.

D

Who's Gaming Oil?

Ran across this blog and immediately subscribed. I'm not sure who's running it or what their motivation might be, but it appears to be a fairly good roll up of recent stories on the oil price rise. More fundamental than even proliferation, I believe that oil will be the most dangerous and destabilizing factor in the world in the next decade. I suppose it's possible that it already has been. Though I talked briefly about this before, it feels like one of two things are happening right now: one, we're having trouble finding enough oil to meet our needs and this will be only exacerabated when India and China get fully up to speed; or, two, somebody is making some change through speculation and artificial shortages a la the energy market in 2001. Whether or not it is artificial, we are sitting on a finite amount of energy in the form of oil, and we had better get on a horse and start looking to diversify either now or in the near future. I don't care how much drilling you do in the Gulf or in Alaska, you can only get so much oil!

FLICKA via AdLand



It's in a foreign language (Swedish?), so just click through and let the page finish loading (the LADDAR will keep flashing on and off until it's done). Then click on the orange splash. Check out how amazingly easy it is to take a standard photo and morph it into the image of beauty. And people wonder why we have a distorted sense of self-image. Or maybe people don't wonder. The problem is that with the market so tuned to giving us what we want if you had the above picture next on the cover of a magazine next to the touched up one, the touched up one would fly off the shelves. I'm not sure WHAT the way out of this mess is, but I don't think the magazine editors are going to be leading the charge on this one. It's going to take something from outside like the "Save the Dolphins" campaign around Tuna. Maybe "Save the Mental Health of the 15 year old"?

Carly's Gone. HP Celebrates.

Wow, this is pretty sad. To paraphrase an invidiual on Slashdot, "You know you're doing something wrong if the employees pop Champagne when you leave." Yikes!

Neocons May Get the Last Laugh

A Republican friend of mine sent me this article and I have to say it certainly looks to be correct. Democracy, or the appearance of democracy anyway, does appear to be spreading. Bill Mahr had a really good point the other day on Fresh Air... if you are a politician, you basically have no opportunity to change your mind or else you're labeled a flip-flopper and inconsistent. I was against the war in the way it was executed and I did not think it was beneficial for us to go into Iraq for any of the stated reasons (WMD, democracy, etc). However, let me take this opportunity to illustrate why I will never hold public office by saying I was wrong. There is no doubt that the war in Iraq has made it clear that if you appear that you are even remotely against the democracy of your people (and your name does not end in "hina") your days are numbered. I question how much of this is window dressing and lucky timing... Syria still has not pulled out; we do not know _what_ kind of democracy will be installed in Iraq (is a theocracy which is against the U.S. better than Saddam?); Arafat died opening up the opportunity for new leadership (unless the CIA is into giving people cancer); and so on. Even with the caveats, the world is taking notice. An open question is how much of a “crazy hobo” strategy is this? By that I mean if you're interested in getting everyone to walk on the other side of the street, one option is to ask every one nicely to move over and politely wait. Another option is to defecate on yourself and scream profanities at the top of your lungs. Are these folks moving over there because you've made a convincing argument or because there's so wigged out by what you're doing they are just staying as far out of your range as possible. My gut tells me the latter is the case, and this does not lend itself to self sustaining stability for the long term. The only way to get people to walk on the other side of the street and keep them there is to provide a more compelling reason for why that is a good thing. Of course my gut has shown bad predictive ability in recent months/years; maybe I should stop listening to it.

Query Letters I Love

Everything creative has already been done. Until now! The concept is the author of this blog posts actual query letters about screenplay ideas. I subscribed to this so fast I sprained my mouse clicking finger.