Living in the Future

Category: Mind Grapes

  • Cell Phones, And The Amazing (Non-) Exploding Gas Pump

    Have a look at the following news story and tell me if you notice anything odd about it:

    Now, it’s difficult to get the full scope of this news story without looking at the report, and unfortunately it got taken down as of the writing of this piece (unclear why, but the page is a 404 now).

    However, we can still use this news article as an example of why it’s critical to think about where a statistic comes from any time you see one. In this case, the report and the article both mention a ‘1 in 10 billion chance’ of a cell phone causing an electric spark that ignites a fire at a gas station.

    The report itself uses this language, citing that there are approximately 1 billion gas fill-ups at stations in Canada in a given year, and the length of time that cell phones have been around (~20 years). However, the report goes on to mention that there hasn’t been a single reported case of a cell phone causing a fire at a gas station, anywhere in the world.

    This seemingly tiny difference totally changes the meaning of the report, and sets the absolute maximum risk at 1 in 10 billion, not the overall risk. Something that has a 1 in 10 billion chance of occurring, which is also something that millions of people do every week, would lead to multiple occurrences every year. And since gas station fires due to cell phones are not constantly being reported (and in fact have *never* been reported), the risk is surely a LOT smaller than 1 in 10 billion.

    It’s critical to take news stories as presented and think critically about them, because people who write the news aren’t necessarily experts in that field (and usually, they aren’t). One neat thing I’ve heard to try is to read a news story that relates directly to something you know extremely well, whatever that may be. Look for inaccuracies, simplifications, or outright factual errors in the story, and you’ll surely find plenty that doesn’t quite hold up.

    It’s a good practice to expect every news story to be about as factual as that, but it’s a lot harder to spot those inaccuracies when you’re not an expert at what’s being presented. The important thing is not to take everything you read or hear on the news at face value.

  • SNC-Lavalin And Why It’s So Hard To Watch The News (For The Truth)

    I’ve noticed recently (maybe it’s just because I’m paying more attention to political news lately) this very annoying trend when it comes to news stories that get even a little bit of attention. This video by Vox is talking about the Green New Deal, but I feel like I feel the exact same way about the SNC-Lavalin incident, to name just one recent example.

    I’ve been feeling for the last year or three that whenever a big news story breaks where opinion could potentially break across political lines, all the news spends all of its airtime just talking about the political impact and outcomes of the story, and if the story still has traction in the days or weeks afterwards, you’ll hear endlessly about what other people are saying about it now.

    I really don’t like when this happens with the news, because it does nothing to inform the public about the actual issue at hand, it just applies a partisan lens to every news story.

    With the SNC-Lavalin ‘scandal’ news story, the Liberal government’s alleged pressure on the attorney general’s office to avoid prosecuting the company directly, we see a great example of this, in my opinion.

    How I have experienced news coverage of SNC-Lavalin

    When this story first came out, the narrative was that of a ‘scandal’ from the highest echelons of the federal Liberal government, with the office of the Prime Minister being accused of applying pressure to the attorney general in dealing with a bribery case with SNC-Lavalin and the Libyan government.

    From the time details started to come out, I was already looking to journalists and the news to understand what actually happened, to figure out if anything improper had taken place. However, what I found on the news, on Twitter, and from every pundit and opposition politician, is outrage that the Prime Minister would do something like this.

    Even the sparse details I put in the paragraph above were pieced together over a few days, and I still don’t feel like I really fully understand all that actually took place leading up to and after the events of the ‘scandal’. I am not of the opinion that absolutely nothing improper took place, or that an investigation should or shouldn’t happen (it probably should).

    I actually feel like I still don’t have enough details about the case to know whether I think deferred prosecution was the right call in the original case, much less whether anything unusual or improper took place afterwards. My main point in talking about all of this is that in spite of trying to stay up to date on the news surrounding this story, I feel woefully uninformed and end up hearing “Politician calls for Trudeau to resign” as the much bigger headline that “Here’s how deferred prosecution works, and the attorney general needs to remain independent”.

    I don’t know about you, but hearing that the head of the opposition thinks the current Prime Minister should step down (especially when it’s a conservative saying that about a liberal), is not a headline that should really exist (because he says it all the time). That’s a separate conversation altogether from considering what I would say is a more reasonable headline, which is “Should The PMO Get Involved In Federal Prosecution Cases?”, or something like that.

    What Can We Possibly Do About This?

    There’s no easy answer to this question. Staying informed is key, but it’s difficult to get partisanship on an issue out of your head once it wriggles its way in. The best thing I can think of to try is to be very careful when reading news to think about who is paying for it, how they are funded, whether the writer or editors might have a reason to be biased, and whether the objective facts are likely being described in the story.

    Using any social media to follow the news, whether you follow news organizations, or just friends and family, is very difficult, because many people are just there to push their preferred version of a story, or end up reinforcing biases and digging in even deeper on opinions and positions formed emotionally.

    Reading the news in general is easier than ever with the internet, but it’s also easier to write and publish anything you want, and otherwise legitimate news organizations can get caught up in this kind of bad journalism too from time to time. Nothing is black and white here, and pretending it is damages journalism and divides us in ways we don’t even consciously realize.

  • Climate change is not just real, it’s obvious

    Vox has posted this before, but it was updated recently with new clips to bring it to the present. It highlights the partisan shift regarding climate change in American politics, from acknowledging that climate change is real, to Republicans realizing the best (only?) way to actually fight climate change effectively from an economic perspective is a tax on greenhouse gas pollution, which of course would be very unpopular for their base (and the business interests funding their re-election campaigns).

    It’s particularly galling to me when you hear the Republican politicians early in the ’16 year’ timeline making points that are good and true about what needs to be done, both with respect to acknowledging the outcomes of scientific research, and to the effects of climate change in general. This is skillfully juxtaposed with clips later in the video where those same people are reversing those previous opinions with industry talking points about the economic impacts of climate change in the coal industry, for example.

    It’s very frustrating to see this all play out like this on a linear timeline, because the hypocrisy of politics in general is expertly laid bare by the editor, with no context or narration given other than sound bites. The conclusion this video presents is quite an obvious one to me, and I think I would be hard pressed to find somebody who wouldn’t agree.

    It’s politically disastrous for a Republican to support the existence of climate change because it will require a tax increase on businesses in order to actually have an impact in the short term (before non-polluting alternative energy becomes more economically advantageous, which will happen in due course). So those politicians, almost exclusively old white dudes, I note, cling to their voters and the business interests supporting their re-election, rather than taking action to prevent the worst effects of climate change.

    We, as humans, are not used to our actions having a global impact, and I think this is why it’s so hard for individual people to accept that something they are doing could ruin the planet and ‘habitat’ of millions of others, but that’s the reality of what’s happening here. Our biology and instincts haven’t caught up with the scale of our civilization, and empathy on a massive scale will be required in order for any real change to come about on this issue.

    Climate, and the well-being of all humanity, should not be a partisan bargaining chip, and I just hope we won’t be too late to fix the problems being caused right now when presented with even more obvious symptoms of the problem. It’s worth bearing in mind this adage: “The Earth will survive humanity, but humans may not“.

  • Abduction As Romance is Just Weird

    I’ve posted about this channel before, as they make a lot of great videos shedding light on some weird, regressive tropes in media, and this one is no exception. Portraying kidnapping situations as ones where two people are equals, and are therefore might lead to romance, has always struck me as a little weird.

    There are lots of things you can do in movies or TV where characters can partner up in creative ways, and many don’t require a character to threaten or hold somebody against their will. Enabling female characters to be more than just victims or valuable objects isn’t difficult, but it typically requires a more diverse writing team. With more voices at the table, these kinds of problematic storylines can usually be avoided, and audiences will usually be more interested and invested in what happens if the stories they see make more sense than a victim immediately developing feeling for their captors.

  • New Crash Course – Media Literacy

    This series is going to be really interesting to me, and I think since most of us never really learned this stuff in school, it’s good to finally open minds to it. And if you did learn it in school, it’s probably worth a refresher, since the media landscape is changing SO fast!

  • Seeds of Thought – Basic Income

    Seeds of Thought – Basic Income

    This past weekend, I sat down to put some of my thoughts about basic income in to words, and to share my proposal for a basic income plan that might work in a country like Canada.

    I made a video (embedded below) that discusses my idea in some detail, as well as going through some of the reasons I think it’s a good idea. The spreadsheet shown in the video can be found at this link* (cleaned up for ease of use compared to the one in the video): Basic Income Tax Plan.

    *The only cell you can adjust in the sheet is the green one at the top to adjust the basic income tax rate.

    I’d love to hear some thoughts or counter-arguments to the idea, or the concept of these brainstorming sessions in general. I really found it a useful way to crystallize what I was thinking on the topic, even though it may not make for the most exciting listening.

  • WTF Society

    WTF Society

    Ignoring important issues for too long can lead to very self-reflective videos. I apologize, but at the same time…I think it’s necessary.

    Here’s an article about the ‘distracted walking’ bill I discuss: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2017/10/27/toronto-mpp-wants-to-ban-people-from-crossing-the-street-while-using-their-cellphones.html

  • The Pizza Diet

    The Pizza Diet

    To be clear, before we begin, weight is just a number. For me, this is about how you feel. This may be less likely to work for you if you feel like you HAVE to lose weight, it’s much easier to keep doing something if it doesn’t require effort. I went from 250 pounds down to my current 195 while eating pretty much all the pizza I wanted, but the only time it ever felt like ‘work’ was when I had to convince myself my hunger was an illusion (which is usually is when we’re surrounded by readily available food).

    Sorry for what sounds like a click bait headline, but this is an important lesson. What you eat, overall, is important for your health. Eating broccoli, salad, and less-processed food on a regular basis is really good for you. But if you’re concerned about your health or weight and want to change either, it doesn’t mean you have to stop eating the food you’re more likely to crave (like pizza).

    I first started focusing on my overall health back in the summer of 2015. I had slowly put on about 40-50 pounds in the 2-3 years previous, and was considered obese (I weighed ~250 pounds all the way from summer 2014 to 2015, despite playing soccer that summer). No matter how active I was, my weight never went below 245.

    It turns out, as I learned in the fall of 2015, the only thing that matters is being aware of how much you eat, and being able to control it (at least, for most people… medical conditions notwithstanding). Through a portion controlled diet, wherein I limited my intake of things like fries, pop, and other typical ‘unhealthy’ foods, I was able to hit 215 pounds by December of 2015, and by the summer of 2016 I was 190, lower than I’d been since middle school.

    Keep in mind, while I did ‘limit’ my portions, and stop eating certain foods, I didn’t limit myself in any other way. I ate burgers, pizza, and snacked pretty much the whole time. But at a restaurant, I would get a soup or salad instead of fries, and if I indulged one day or for a weekend, I doubled down on my efforts the next few days after.

    By doing this, I didn’t lose weight every day, but I did drop 2-3 pounds a week while I was biking, and continued to lose 1-2 pounds a week once it got too cold for that. I had a strategy that worked for me, and I felt better, looked healthier, and needed to buy a whole lot of new clothes.

    Now, in 2017, I’m still biking to work every day I possibly can, and I’m ranging from 192-197 pounds depending on the day of the week (I’m not as strict on weekends). I have been weighing myself every day since July of 2015 (except on vacation), and I’ve still never felt better. I know exactly how much I should eat in a day to maintain my weight, and if I’m enjoying a good meal or snack, I let myself enjoy it!

    So, this brings us all the way back to the title of this post. It really isn’t clickbait. I eat pizza around 6 times a week, and it isn’t the reason I weigh more on some days than others. I probably shouldn’t eat pizza as much as I am for my general health, but in terms of keeping my weight where I want, the type of food I eat has almost no bearing on that.

    It’s all about being aware of how much you’re eating, and reasonable portions once you figure out how easy it is to overeat. For me, even more than calories in/calories out, it’s much more s matter of grams in/grams out. And it’s been working for over 2 years now.

    I’ll have more on how I got to this point in future posts.

  • Oh yeah, empathy.

    Why do I care so much that millions of people in another country, only a handful of whom I’ve ever met before, might lose their health care very soon?

  • The Goldilocks iPhone
    No, not this one…

    The Goldilocks iPhone

    At the beginning of this week, Apple announced 3 new phone models, the iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X. The ‘8’ models are available for pre-order now, with delivery starting on September 22, while the all-new iPhone X isn’t shipping until the beginning of November (and will start at $1319 CAD before tax or the AppleCare+ warranty).

    I love getting new iPhones, and if you have one that’s more than two years old, you’ll probably start to notice new features slowing down the interface just a little bit. But for me, the biggest reason I spent about 5 years as a serial iPhone updater was the camera. Improvements to camera hardware on smartphones have been unbelievable since the first iPhone packed in a blurry 2.0 MP lens in 2007.

    When I first upgraded from the 3.5 inch iPhone 4S to the 4 inch iPhone 5 in 2012, the tiny amount of extra screen space was barely even a consideration in my purchase. I liked having a small phone because my iPad was my lap-top (literally) computing device when I was at home, so the iPhone could really shine when I was out and about.

    In 2014, Apple took another step up in screen sizes, releasing the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus, at 4.7 and 5.5 inches respectively. At that time, while I didn’t love that my phone wasn’t going to be nearly as compact, I accepted the tradeoffs, and openly embraced the larger screen of the iPhone 6. However, what I don’t think I ever really forgot was the compactness of the screen width of the original iPhone (which stayed the same from its unveiling in January of 2007 all the way to September of 2014).

    The iPhone 6s was the first iPhone release I skipped since the iPhone 3GS, for a combination of reasons (mostly financial). In hindsight, it seems kind of obvious that I wasn’t as much of a fan of the bigger sizes at the time either, but I recall myself repeating consistently that if Apple ever made a new 4 inch phone with modern internals (camera, processor, etc.), that I would be hard pressed to not upgrade to that one.

    In the spring of 2016, when the larger iPhone 6 models had been out for almost 18 months, Apple made my dreams come true and released a new 4 inch phone, the iPhone SE. I got the SE and sold my iPhone 6, and immediately I was happier about every aspect of the phone except for the screen size.

    When I had the iPhone 6, I was constantly having to deal with little annoyances. The best thing about it was the bigger screen, making looking at it and watching video nicer and easier. Unfortunately, the rounded sides were pleasantly curved, but made the phone a lot harder to grip compared to the chamfered edges of the iPhones 4 and 5.

    If you watch a lot of video, or your iPhone is the only handheld computer you own, maybe getting the most screen size is the best way to go, size be damned. But in a world where iPads exist and are getting more and more versatile, for my needs, having a tiny mobile iPhone and a regular sized iPad is the perfect balance.

    I’m very excited about the new iPhone X (ten), and I hope I can convince my lovely wife that it’s worth the upgrade, even though it probably isn’t (amazing cameras aside). But I still like to loudly, and with conviction, state for the record that if Apple put out a new 4 inch iPhone with current specs and cameras and functionality, I would spend whatever it took to get it.

    Unfortunately, as with everything in computers, miniaturization is hard. Building a 5.8 inch screen phone with everything the iPhone X contains is much, much easier than doing so with a 4 inch phone. The more space you have to work with, the easier phone making is, even if you invented the modern smartphone with a 3.5 inch screen.