A few months ago I read the second Freakonomics book, SuperFreakonomics, and struck by a section of the book dealing the activities of a company called Intellectual Ventures. Much of the discussion focused on the suggestions that the company has for dealing with tropical storm suppression and and reducing global warming. On the whole, the book provided a very positive portrayal of the company.
In a subsequent two-part episode episode of the Freakonomics podcast this company, and its founder Nathan Myhrvold made another appearance in the Freakonomics canon, this time in relation to the recently published cookbook Modernist Cuisine: The Art and Science of Cooking. Again, the portrayal was very positive and the focus was on the invention and research side of the company's operations. Actually, if memory serves me correctly, these are the only aspects of the company that are even mentioned.
As a result of these portrayals of the company I just assumed that it was primarily a R & D firm, maybe even verging on a philanthropic venture.
As of last night I have been given some reason to question my original assessment.
A recent This American Life examination of some of the company's patent related activities suggests a slightly different image of the company. From this vantage point the company is portrayed predominately as an owner and licenser of thousands and thousands of patents. They note that the company, or that related third parties, frequently use legal action to secure settlements from companies that are deemed to be infringing on their patents. At times, though I am not sure if the two individuals reporting the story say it directly, the company is compared to a protection racket.
I always love it when I am left with opposing senses of things due to conflicting media reports. It is all the more impressive that these conflicting portrayals are both from New York based public radio shows.
Cases like this always remind me that I need to be a little more critical when consuming media. Of course the problem is that it takes time and energy to be so critical, and I quite frequently don't have the time or energy to invest in these issues. Maybe it's sufficient that I am at least aware of some of the problems with current forms of mass media?
Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts
Monday, July 25, 2011
Saturday, October 04, 2008
So You Juggle Mighty Young Joe?
Yesterday, while looking through the list of databases that Dalhousie provides I came across one called 'Street Terms,' which is maintained by the US Office of National Drug Control Policy. It seems that this resource, I don't think I would actually call it a database, provides drug related terminology and definitions. (To access the content you need to scroll down to the bottom of the page, they also provide a PDF version of the content).
Some of these are remarkably amusing. For instance, apparently 'juggle' means to sell drugs while 'mighty young joe' refers to depressants. I am pretty sure that you can use any of them in a sentence as I did, I can't imagine that there are regional variations or community specific terms (if there were they surely would have been noted in the source).
My first thought was how this could possibly be up to date. I would imagine that almost as soon as such data could be collected, compiled, and published that it would be out of date. How long is 'mighty young joe' really going to be used to refer to depressants? Providing a static list like this seems to be a little bit less than useful. It seems a much better tool might be the development of some kind of user moderated list that members of the law enforcement and prevention/counseling communities could access and update on a regular basis. The simple slowness of the current approach surely impacts its effectiveness.
Anyway, check it out so that you can be up to speed with the latest in drug related terminology.
Some of these are remarkably amusing. For instance, apparently 'juggle' means to sell drugs while 'mighty young joe' refers to depressants. I am pretty sure that you can use any of them in a sentence as I did, I can't imagine that there are regional variations or community specific terms (if there were they surely would have been noted in the source).
My first thought was how this could possibly be up to date. I would imagine that almost as soon as such data could be collected, compiled, and published that it would be out of date. How long is 'mighty young joe' really going to be used to refer to depressants? Providing a static list like this seems to be a little bit less than useful. It seems a much better tool might be the development of some kind of user moderated list that members of the law enforcement and prevention/counseling communities could access and update on a regular basis. The simple slowness of the current approach surely impacts its effectiveness.
Anyway, check it out so that you can be up to speed with the latest in drug related terminology.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
A Few Quick Notes 220
-The weather seems to have finally turned the corner and started to improve. Fortunately, with the increase of sun we have also had a decrease in heat, making the days much easier to tolerate. As far as I know this is what is to be expected for much of the rest of the week.
-Things have definitely started at school. As of this morning I have had all three of my classes, finalized my TA assignment, and secured an RA position. Along with all of these responsibilities comes a pile of reading, a pile that I hope to be able to make my way through in a reasonable fashion.
-Yesterday, while grocery shopping, I purchased a banana plant. While the plant is quite small, and in a small pot, it appears to be healthy and alive. What I don't know about the plant is whether it is the type of banana plant that might be expected to produce bananas at some stage (presumably once I transfer it to a pot of a reasonable size). I guess I will wait to see how it does in the coming days.
-Our comedy club experience last Thursday was pretty good. All of us managed to get in for a total of $12, a pretty fair price. Almost as soon as things got under way we learned that the advertised headliner wasn't going to be appearing but that we would be seeing about four comics through the night.
While the emcee had his ups and downs all three of us really enjoyed the other three comedians. Rebecca, who was a little hesitant at the begining of the night, seemed quite interested in seeing one of the comics when he comes back to headline a show in a few weeks time.
I should also say that the drinks were reasonably priced, which wasn't what we expected. Unfortunately we did experience two problems with the drinks. Firstly, the beer selection was very limited. The bar stocked only 6 types of beer, all of which were distributed by a single national brewery. Secondly, Rebecca's cola was off, so off that it didn't even smell like cola. Because the first one was so off we didn't go back for a second so we don't know if what we experienced was part of a trend or was a one-off incident.
-Things have definitely started at school. As of this morning I have had all three of my classes, finalized my TA assignment, and secured an RA position. Along with all of these responsibilities comes a pile of reading, a pile that I hope to be able to make my way through in a reasonable fashion.
-Yesterday, while grocery shopping, I purchased a banana plant. While the plant is quite small, and in a small pot, it appears to be healthy and alive. What I don't know about the plant is whether it is the type of banana plant that might be expected to produce bananas at some stage (presumably once I transfer it to a pot of a reasonable size). I guess I will wait to see how it does in the coming days.
-Our comedy club experience last Thursday was pretty good. All of us managed to get in for a total of $12, a pretty fair price. Almost as soon as things got under way we learned that the advertised headliner wasn't going to be appearing but that we would be seeing about four comics through the night.
While the emcee had his ups and downs all three of us really enjoyed the other three comedians. Rebecca, who was a little hesitant at the begining of the night, seemed quite interested in seeing one of the comics when he comes back to headline a show in a few weeks time.
I should also say that the drinks were reasonably priced, which wasn't what we expected. Unfortunately we did experience two problems with the drinks. Firstly, the beer selection was very limited. The bar stocked only 6 types of beer, all of which were distributed by a single national brewery. Secondly, Rebecca's cola was off, so off that it didn't even smell like cola. Because the first one was so off we didn't go back for a second so we don't know if what we experienced was part of a trend or was a one-off incident.
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Market Research
Several months ago, while I was still in Montreal, I received an email informing me that I had been specially selected to participate in a Chapters customer research initiative called Voices Advisory Panel. If I agree to participate they, Chapters, would, from time to time, send me brief surveys relating to my book shopping experiences. As I am a sucker for this kind of thing I agreed to participate and filled out my first survey. Now several months and surveys later I have noticed a few problems with this incarnation of market research.
One of the first major problems is the incentive program. I guess the idea is that by offering me a chance to win a $50 gift card I will jump at the chance to answer their surveys. This certainly isn’t what hooked me (as I am only there because I like answering surveys), and I doubt that it hooked that many others. The more I think about it the more insulting it seems. For some untold number of months or years I am supposed to take time out of my day just for the chance to win a $50 gift card? It seems that a scheme that they might consider would be to give all participants a $5 credit on their account, making it likely that they will spend the free $5 along with a few more supplied by the participant. As a participant, not only would I think I was getting a good deal I would also likely buy more. On top of this, I think that such a scheme has the ability to create devoted customers as well as make money.
So once one gets past the less than inviting incentive scheme and onto the meat of the exercise they are confronted by a series of poor questions and a badly designed series of surveys. One of the main problems with the questions seems to be the biases held by the writers. Frequently it is assumed that we as participants view the services offered by the store in the same light as management. On the survey on bargain books they did not offer me a place to show my disdain for coffee table books about WWII shipwrecks, or for that matter most coffee table books available in most bargain book sections. If they don’t know that the prevalence of coffee table books is driving me away from the bargain book section and they don’t offer me a place to provide them with this information then their questions relating to signage will be somewhat of a waste, especially if they don’t make a corresponding change to the distasteful content. Assuming that their sales problem relates to signage, or marketing, rather than available materials is a great oversight. If all you have to sell are coffee table books then the size of the font on a sign is not going to make a difference when it comes to my purchasing habits.
The problem of poorly conceived and poorly written questions is compounded by the decision that they have made to not allow one to skip a question. In many cases each survey I find that I am being forced to provide an answer that does not truly, or even come close to, representing how I actually feel about the situation. Depending on the number of respondents who feel this way they may have a problem on their hand. It is quite likely that all of this is for naught. They could be collecting survey after survey of completely worthless data and then making marketing decisions based on their pre-conceived and biased notions of what it is their customers want and respond to.
Though to give the authors of the surveys credit, in many instances respondents are given the opportunity to provide opinions in prose. Unfortunately, those analyzing the data then have to deal with individuals like me who take the opportunity to vent their frustration about the absurdity of the survey instead of instead of dealing with the desired question. An additional problem with this type of question that I know I create is that I tend to provide answers that may use a broader interpretation of the question or expect a greater degree of change than they might be willing to make.
At the end of the day the real question might be why I am complaining so vigorously about something I have continued to do voluntarily for some number of months. I guess I might feel this way because I am not fundamentally opposed to market research that has the goal of providing customers with a more desirable set of commercial offerings (even if the fundamental goal of the company is to make money). If this research is conducted successfully and the results properly analyzed and effective policies are implemented then, hopefully, the range of products and services available will more closely suit my needs than range of products and services that was available before this research. In this particular case I find it frustrating to see what could be thousands of people, myself included, spending time on a project that will eventually see likely see no positive results as a result of this tremendous expenditure of time and effort.
One of the first major problems is the incentive program. I guess the idea is that by offering me a chance to win a $50 gift card I will jump at the chance to answer their surveys. This certainly isn’t what hooked me (as I am only there because I like answering surveys), and I doubt that it hooked that many others. The more I think about it the more insulting it seems. For some untold number of months or years I am supposed to take time out of my day just for the chance to win a $50 gift card? It seems that a scheme that they might consider would be to give all participants a $5 credit on their account, making it likely that they will spend the free $5 along with a few more supplied by the participant. As a participant, not only would I think I was getting a good deal I would also likely buy more. On top of this, I think that such a scheme has the ability to create devoted customers as well as make money.
So once one gets past the less than inviting incentive scheme and onto the meat of the exercise they are confronted by a series of poor questions and a badly designed series of surveys. One of the main problems with the questions seems to be the biases held by the writers. Frequently it is assumed that we as participants view the services offered by the store in the same light as management. On the survey on bargain books they did not offer me a place to show my disdain for coffee table books about WWII shipwrecks, or for that matter most coffee table books available in most bargain book sections. If they don’t know that the prevalence of coffee table books is driving me away from the bargain book section and they don’t offer me a place to provide them with this information then their questions relating to signage will be somewhat of a waste, especially if they don’t make a corresponding change to the distasteful content. Assuming that their sales problem relates to signage, or marketing, rather than available materials is a great oversight. If all you have to sell are coffee table books then the size of the font on a sign is not going to make a difference when it comes to my purchasing habits.
The problem of poorly conceived and poorly written questions is compounded by the decision that they have made to not allow one to skip a question. In many cases each survey I find that I am being forced to provide an answer that does not truly, or even come close to, representing how I actually feel about the situation. Depending on the number of respondents who feel this way they may have a problem on their hand. It is quite likely that all of this is for naught. They could be collecting survey after survey of completely worthless data and then making marketing decisions based on their pre-conceived and biased notions of what it is their customers want and respond to.
Though to give the authors of the surveys credit, in many instances respondents are given the opportunity to provide opinions in prose. Unfortunately, those analyzing the data then have to deal with individuals like me who take the opportunity to vent their frustration about the absurdity of the survey instead of instead of dealing with the desired question. An additional problem with this type of question that I know I create is that I tend to provide answers that may use a broader interpretation of the question or expect a greater degree of change than they might be willing to make.
At the end of the day the real question might be why I am complaining so vigorously about something I have continued to do voluntarily for some number of months. I guess I might feel this way because I am not fundamentally opposed to market research that has the goal of providing customers with a more desirable set of commercial offerings (even if the fundamental goal of the company is to make money). If this research is conducted successfully and the results properly analyzed and effective policies are implemented then, hopefully, the range of products and services available will more closely suit my needs than range of products and services that was available before this research. In this particular case I find it frustrating to see what could be thousands of people, myself included, spending time on a project that will eventually see likely see no positive results as a result of this tremendous expenditure of time and effort.
Saturday, August 04, 2007
A Few Quick Notes 110
-Today is another nice summer day in St. John’s. While not hot, the temperature is by no means cold, though I can imagine that some might say that it is cool. Actually, while on my early morning bagel run with my sister, she claimed it was cool enough to need a jacket. Not surprisingly, at least from my perspective, she soon found that it was actually warm enough and removed the jacket.
-As some of you might have been able to deduce from comments written above, Georgetown Bakery has re-opened after their summer hiatus. Not surprisingly, it was pretty busy, many people obviously wanted their fix after going two and a half week without Georgetown products.
-On the subject of stores, several weeks ago I learned that the NLC store on Water Street will be closing in the near future, though I don’t know an exact date. Prior to learning that it was closing I learned, by reading NLC’s annual report, that, comparatively, it did not make that much money. For the year reported, the small store in Churchill Square and the Water Street stores had similar revenues.
This closure may cause some of you to worry that your access to high-end wines will be disappearing, but this is not the case. It seems that controversial new store, built on what was once a field, even now has a better selection of high-end wines than the Water Street store.
-On Tuesday, as is my practice, I went to the Rose and Thistle for their weekly trivia night. As the evening was to get underway promptly at 9:00 PM I arrived a little earlier than usual so that I would be sure to have a good table. Not surprisingly there wasn’t a big rush and upon my entry I became one of only two patrons in the bar. This wasn’t so bad as I had a free copy of the Town Cryer (sp?) with which I was able to distract myself.
With plenty of time to spare Peter showed up and we patiently waited for things to get underway. As we should have expected, this didn’t really happen at the pace that we had been lead to believe it would last week. As usual things got underway ten or fifteen minutes after 9:00 PM.
As the first fifteen questions were being asked there was a definite sense among the participants that they were on the easy side of things. Even if this is the case, my experience is that the second half is typically more difficult than the first half.
Anyway, as we proceeded to the second half we were feeling pretty good about the early round, and pretty good about the questions in the second round, though were definitely a few that we did not get. Unfortunately, the host did not open up a question about the boroughs of New York that would have allowed me to earn us an extra point. Anyway, thing were still ok. Fortunately this week, unlike last week, there were no instances of last minute changes or disagreements that lead to the correct answer being exchanged for the wrong answer. Shortly after the final question we handed the host a copy of our answer sheet (so that he can confirm the score we have given ourselves).
As the correcting started out positive feeling continued, it seemed that we had a few that several other teams had missed, though we also missed a few. By the time the grading had stopped we appeared to have 24 out of a possible 30.5. As the host counted down from 30.5 our hopes of winning grew, particularly as he a steadily approached out number without anyone else announcing a higher score. Suddenly he reached 24 and we alerted him of our having attained that score.
It seemed that another team also was trying to indicate that they too had a similar score. Actually, as it turned out, they were thought that they had 24.5. After the host checked their answers it became clear that they actually had only 24. The host then went on to check our score. Within a few minutes he came over to our table and indicated that he only was able to count 23 on our sheet. We then started to go through the questions one by one, that was until we reached the question about what “SWAT” stood for. It seemed that on the answer sheet that we had given him we had actually written “special tactics and tactics” instead of “special weapons and tactics” as we had written on our copy of the answer sheet. The biggest burn was that we had actually written the correct answer on the back of the sheet that we had handed him. I guess we will just have to be more careful next time.
-Several months ago, May 1 to be exact, I placed an ILL request at the A.C. Hunter library. Since the placing of the request over three months ago I have heard nothing from the library. By this point I would think that they might say that they will not be able to procure the book or give me some kind of time frame, or even just let me know that they haven’t forgotten about the book. I guess I should go back and let them know if they don’t have it shortly then it will be to late, I will have left the province. I just didn’t imagine that it would take more than 3 months (particularly when there is a free version of WorldCat with which they could have located a copy book in about 1 minute).
-Last night I played a game called ‘kubb.’ Apparently this game’s history can be traced back to the Vikings a thousand years ago. The basic premise of the game is that teams are trying to knock down the opposing team’s blocks before their own are knocked down. As one might guess, with a thousand years under its belt many variations have been developed, each of which adds a particular element to the game. If you are curious, it was pretty fun as well as simple. It should also be noted that this is definitely an outdoor game (though as a child I definitely would have been tempted to play a modified version in the living room).
-After reading a biographical timeline outlining the major events in Benazir Bhutto’s life in today’s Globe and Mail I examined their short list of sources. Along side such sources as the Encyclopaedia Britannica and H.W. Wilson were Wikipedia and Famousmuslims.com. While I don’t know exactly how these sources were used, I certainly hope that any information from any of these less than completely credible sources was confirmed in more credible sources. I really would not have expected the Globe, or any self-respecting newspaper, to turn to Wikipedia on such a subject, particularly when certain parties might be interested in presenting her in a certain light. While I don’t know that this is happening, I would still think it too risky to use Wikipedia because of the ease with which such tampering could occur.
-As some of you might have been able to deduce from comments written above, Georgetown Bakery has re-opened after their summer hiatus. Not surprisingly, it was pretty busy, many people obviously wanted their fix after going two and a half week without Georgetown products.
-On the subject of stores, several weeks ago I learned that the NLC store on Water Street will be closing in the near future, though I don’t know an exact date. Prior to learning that it was closing I learned, by reading NLC’s annual report, that, comparatively, it did not make that much money. For the year reported, the small store in Churchill Square and the Water Street stores had similar revenues.
This closure may cause some of you to worry that your access to high-end wines will be disappearing, but this is not the case. It seems that controversial new store, built on what was once a field, even now has a better selection of high-end wines than the Water Street store.
-On Tuesday, as is my practice, I went to the Rose and Thistle for their weekly trivia night. As the evening was to get underway promptly at 9:00 PM I arrived a little earlier than usual so that I would be sure to have a good table. Not surprisingly there wasn’t a big rush and upon my entry I became one of only two patrons in the bar. This wasn’t so bad as I had a free copy of the Town Cryer (sp?) with which I was able to distract myself.
With plenty of time to spare Peter showed up and we patiently waited for things to get underway. As we should have expected, this didn’t really happen at the pace that we had been lead to believe it would last week. As usual things got underway ten or fifteen minutes after 9:00 PM.
As the first fifteen questions were being asked there was a definite sense among the participants that they were on the easy side of things. Even if this is the case, my experience is that the second half is typically more difficult than the first half.
Anyway, as we proceeded to the second half we were feeling pretty good about the early round, and pretty good about the questions in the second round, though were definitely a few that we did not get. Unfortunately, the host did not open up a question about the boroughs of New York that would have allowed me to earn us an extra point. Anyway, thing were still ok. Fortunately this week, unlike last week, there were no instances of last minute changes or disagreements that lead to the correct answer being exchanged for the wrong answer. Shortly after the final question we handed the host a copy of our answer sheet (so that he can confirm the score we have given ourselves).
As the correcting started out positive feeling continued, it seemed that we had a few that several other teams had missed, though we also missed a few. By the time the grading had stopped we appeared to have 24 out of a possible 30.5. As the host counted down from 30.5 our hopes of winning grew, particularly as he a steadily approached out number without anyone else announcing a higher score. Suddenly he reached 24 and we alerted him of our having attained that score.
It seemed that another team also was trying to indicate that they too had a similar score. Actually, as it turned out, they were thought that they had 24.5. After the host checked their answers it became clear that they actually had only 24. The host then went on to check our score. Within a few minutes he came over to our table and indicated that he only was able to count 23 on our sheet. We then started to go through the questions one by one, that was until we reached the question about what “SWAT” stood for. It seemed that on the answer sheet that we had given him we had actually written “special tactics and tactics” instead of “special weapons and tactics” as we had written on our copy of the answer sheet. The biggest burn was that we had actually written the correct answer on the back of the sheet that we had handed him. I guess we will just have to be more careful next time.
-Several months ago, May 1 to be exact, I placed an ILL request at the A.C. Hunter library. Since the placing of the request over three months ago I have heard nothing from the library. By this point I would think that they might say that they will not be able to procure the book or give me some kind of time frame, or even just let me know that they haven’t forgotten about the book. I guess I should go back and let them know if they don’t have it shortly then it will be to late, I will have left the province. I just didn’t imagine that it would take more than 3 months (particularly when there is a free version of WorldCat with which they could have located a copy book in about 1 minute).
-Last night I played a game called ‘kubb.’ Apparently this game’s history can be traced back to the Vikings a thousand years ago. The basic premise of the game is that teams are trying to knock down the opposing team’s blocks before their own are knocked down. As one might guess, with a thousand years under its belt many variations have been developed, each of which adds a particular element to the game. If you are curious, it was pretty fun as well as simple. It should also be noted that this is definitely an outdoor game (though as a child I definitely would have been tempted to play a modified version in the living room).
-After reading a biographical timeline outlining the major events in Benazir Bhutto’s life in today’s Globe and Mail I examined their short list of sources. Along side such sources as the Encyclopaedia Britannica and H.W. Wilson were Wikipedia and Famousmuslims.com. While I don’t know exactly how these sources were used, I certainly hope that any information from any of these less than completely credible sources was confirmed in more credible sources. I really would not have expected the Globe, or any self-respecting newspaper, to turn to Wikipedia on such a subject, particularly when certain parties might be interested in presenting her in a certain light. While I don’t know that this is happening, I would still think it too risky to use Wikipedia because of the ease with which such tampering could occur.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)