Sometimes people can't celebrate their birthday on their actual birthday, because the people they most want to celebrate with aren't available on that day.
Solution: public, meet-up style birthday parties for anyone who has a birthday that day. I'm picturing the parties being held by a group of bars or pubs - the kind of place where any random person can walk in and have a good time - that would rotate among themselves so each one has to throw a birthday party only every couple of weeks or so.
You go in, show ID showing that it's your birthday, and you're entitled to one free drink and a piece of cake and maybe all the nachos you can eat over the course of the evening (or whatever else they can give away without wrecking their margins). The employees (and, hopefully, other customers and birthday people) congratulate you and wish you happy birthday and generally make a fuss over you. Maybe there could also be bonus freebies for people celebrating a milestone birthday. There would also be a general discount for people whose birthday it isn't on birthday party days, so there will be other people around to wish happy birthday to the birthday people.
The bars get attention, publicity, drink sales (because few people are going to limit themselves to the one free drink on their birthday), and maybe some new regulars who remember how this bar made them feel happy and welcome and celebrated on that birthday when they were all alone.
The bar's regulars get a discount and a bit of a party atmosphere on that particular day, and the possibility of attracting new and interesting regulars to the bar (if the birthday people are made to feel happy and welcome and celebrated.)
The birthday people get something fun to do on their birthday that makes them feel happy and welcome and celebrated, plus they get to meet other people who have the same birthday and thereby make friends who will totally be into celebrating their birthday on their birthday next year!
And, because the birthday people will meet birthday buddies, they might be able to make it just a one-year project. This would eliminate any "Meh, I'll go next year" sentiment among the birthday people, and thereby increase attendance and popularity.
Showing posts with label free ideas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free ideas. Show all posts
Saturday, October 19, 2013
Wednesday, October 02, 2013
By request: my essay-writing technique
Conventional wisdom is that, when writing an essay, you should decide what your thesis is, determine what points best prove that thesis, use this information to prepare an outline, and then flesh it out into a full essay.
This was never particularly good for me, because either I had no idea what my thesis should be, or I had a brilliant idea for a thesis but couldn't quite pull the essay together.
So in university, I came up with another technique.
I started by opening a blank Word document and typing out everything I knew that was remotely relevant. Some if it would be in nice sentences and paragraphs, some of it would be in point form, some of it would be a list of questions to answer. I'd usually also have stray analogies and turns of phrase that I wouldn't mind working in there somewhere. I'd just braindump until my brain emptied, then put it aside.
The next day, I'd open it up again, read it over, add anything that occurred to me, and then figure out what thesis was most naturally proven by all this stuff I'd written.
Then I'd drag all the stuff on the screen around until it landed in the order that best proved the thesis, marking any gaps with "[...]" or "[talk about widgets here]" or whatever. Then I had my outline. And over half my essay.
If I had time, I'd put it aside overnight again, and then fill in those blanks I'd left the next day. After letting it sit overnight, filling in those blanks always seemed like a remarkably easy task. Just a few sentences here and there, no biggie! (If I didn't have time to let it sit overnight before I did this, I'd do all I could by brute force.)
Then another overnight, a fresh morning edit, and we're done!
If I didn't have time for more than one overnight, I'd do the braindump and determine the thesis on the same day, but with a break in between and in two different locations. (For example, braindump at home, spend an hour gaming, get dinner, then determine my thesis in the library.)
The result was an essay that does its job as well as possible. Because my thesis was supported by the points I knew most about, it was (very nearly by definition) the best-proven thesis I could come up with, and proven to the best of my ability. Essays written this way always got As, many of which were high As (at the university level), whereas essays written by choosing my thesis first more often got Bs, occasionally low As.
This was never particularly good for me, because either I had no idea what my thesis should be, or I had a brilliant idea for a thesis but couldn't quite pull the essay together.
So in university, I came up with another technique.
I started by opening a blank Word document and typing out everything I knew that was remotely relevant. Some if it would be in nice sentences and paragraphs, some of it would be in point form, some of it would be a list of questions to answer. I'd usually also have stray analogies and turns of phrase that I wouldn't mind working in there somewhere. I'd just braindump until my brain emptied, then put it aside.
The next day, I'd open it up again, read it over, add anything that occurred to me, and then figure out what thesis was most naturally proven by all this stuff I'd written.
Then I'd drag all the stuff on the screen around until it landed in the order that best proved the thesis, marking any gaps with "[...]" or "[talk about widgets here]" or whatever. Then I had my outline. And over half my essay.
If I had time, I'd put it aside overnight again, and then fill in those blanks I'd left the next day. After letting it sit overnight, filling in those blanks always seemed like a remarkably easy task. Just a few sentences here and there, no biggie! (If I didn't have time to let it sit overnight before I did this, I'd do all I could by brute force.)
Then another overnight, a fresh morning edit, and we're done!
If I didn't have time for more than one overnight, I'd do the braindump and determine the thesis on the same day, but with a break in between and in two different locations. (For example, braindump at home, spend an hour gaming, get dinner, then determine my thesis in the library.)
The result was an essay that does its job as well as possible. Because my thesis was supported by the points I knew most about, it was (very nearly by definition) the best-proven thesis I could come up with, and proven to the best of my ability. Essays written this way always got As, many of which were high As (at the university level), whereas essays written by choosing my thesis first more often got Bs, occasionally low As.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Building a Better Senate redux
I previously blogged some ideas for improving the Senate, building on the advantages of the existing model by making it less partisan.
While reading this article (although not directly related to its content), I came up with a simpler way to do the same thing.
First, we make senators non-partisan. They can't be members of a party, they don't identify themselves as "Conservative senators" or "Liberal senators", there are no Senate party caucuses. They're just senators.
Then comes the important part: government of the day cannot appoint any senators who are or have ever been members of its political party (or any of that party's predecessors). It can appoint people who are or have been members of other political parties, it can appoint people who have never been a member of any political party, but it can't appoint from its own party.
Possible corollary, depending on what percentage of the people who are good senate candidates have ever been members of political parties: each government must appoint a minimum number of senators who are or have been been a member of another political party. I can see pros and cons of this.
But, either way, it would be the political equivalent of having one sibling cut the cake and another choose the slice.
While reading this article (although not directly related to its content), I came up with a simpler way to do the same thing.
First, we make senators non-partisan. They can't be members of a party, they don't identify themselves as "Conservative senators" or "Liberal senators", there are no Senate party caucuses. They're just senators.
Then comes the important part: government of the day cannot appoint any senators who are or have ever been members of its political party (or any of that party's predecessors). It can appoint people who are or have been members of other political parties, it can appoint people who have never been a member of any political party, but it can't appoint from its own party.
Possible corollary, depending on what percentage of the people who are good senate candidates have ever been members of political parties: each government must appoint a minimum number of senators who are or have been been a member of another political party. I can see pros and cons of this.
But, either way, it would be the political equivalent of having one sibling cut the cake and another choose the slice.
Sunday, June 02, 2013
Diluting shredded paper
They make paper shredders that shred paper to different sizes, and the smaller it shreds the paper, the more expensive the paper shredder. Presumably this is because it would be harder to reassemble the paper if it's shredded smaller.
I find myself wondering if you could also make it more difficult for someone who wanted to reassemble the paper by diluting the shredded paper. What if only 10% of the paper you shredded was important documents that actually needed to be shredded, and 90% of it was random unimportant documents?
What if you physically mixed up the shredded paper before dumping it in recycling? What if you put shredded paper from the same batch of shredding in multiple recycling containers?
Before I owned a paper shredder, I'd rip up sensitive documents and put parts of them (usually the parts with my name) in with my kitchen garbage. I figurde if someone is going to dig through the dumpsters and try to reassemble my documents, I can at least make it as unpleasant as possible. What if you put a portion of the shredded paper in the green bin? (Apparently paper in the green bin is allowed - my parents use newspapers to line their organics garbage can, then throw the whole piece of newspaper in the green bin with the garbage enclosed.)
I don't know if the additional security gained from doing any of these things would be worth the effort, but it's fun to think of ideas.
I find myself wondering if you could also make it more difficult for someone who wanted to reassemble the paper by diluting the shredded paper. What if only 10% of the paper you shredded was important documents that actually needed to be shredded, and 90% of it was random unimportant documents?
What if you physically mixed up the shredded paper before dumping it in recycling? What if you put shredded paper from the same batch of shredding in multiple recycling containers?
Before I owned a paper shredder, I'd rip up sensitive documents and put parts of them (usually the parts with my name) in with my kitchen garbage. I figurde if someone is going to dig through the dumpsters and try to reassemble my documents, I can at least make it as unpleasant as possible. What if you put a portion of the shredded paper in the green bin? (Apparently paper in the green bin is allowed - my parents use newspapers to line their organics garbage can, then throw the whole piece of newspaper in the green bin with the garbage enclosed.)
I don't know if the additional security gained from doing any of these things would be worth the effort, but it's fun to think of ideas.
Saturday, March 02, 2013
How to organize hair accessories
I was sorting through a drawer, and I noticed it contained a lot of loose hair clips, and a lot of loose hair elastics. I was considering getting some kind of container or organizing device, and then I had a brainstorm:
I grouped all the like clips together, then I wrapped all the like hair elastics around each bundle of clips. The elastics keep the clips together in bundles, and the clips provide something to wrap the elastics around without stretching them out, so they won't rattle around loose and sink to the bottom of the drawer.
This takes up less space than any organizing device, the hair accessories are far more readily visible in the drawer than when they're loose, and I can tell what I own at a glance.
I grouped all the like clips together, then I wrapped all the like hair elastics around each bundle of clips. The elastics keep the clips together in bundles, and the clips provide something to wrap the elastics around without stretching them out, so they won't rattle around loose and sink to the bottom of the drawer.
This takes up less space than any organizing device, the hair accessories are far more readily visible in the drawer than when they're loose, and I can tell what I own at a glance.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Things the Library Should Invent: subscribe to author or series
A while back, I read and enjoyed Daughter of Smoke and Bone. I
then googled it and learned that a sequel was in the works, but the
title and release date of the sequel hadn't been announced yet. Then I
forgot about all it.
Fortunately, the sequel (entitled Days of Blood and Starlight - I
haven't read it yet so no spoilers please) turned up on some of the Best
Books of 2012 lists, so I was reminded of its existence and added it to
my holds list. However, if it hadn't been
mentioned in an article I read, I would never have thought to look it up
again and would miss the opportunity to spend more time with the
characters.
The same thing keeps happening with the Dexter series. I forget to
look for new books and discover two have been written since I last
checked, or I check for new books and find that there aren't any. I'd
also be interested in reading whatever Malcolm
Gladwell happens to write next, but he hasn't published in 3 years. I
also think I'm going to keep reading the Inspector Gamache series once I
catch up, but I don't know whether it's on a predictable publication
schedule.
I don't want to subscribe to all the authors' newsletters, because
in many cases I’m not actively involved in the fandom so I don't want
all the promotional material about book signings and paperback release
dates and media appearances. I just want to
be informed when there's a new book to add to my holds list.
I think the library would be able to help me with this.
I'd like to be able to select an author or series out of the
library catalogue, and have it automatically add any new title from that
author or series to my holds list. Users who subscribed first get
placed on the holds list first, and users would have
the choice whether to add the title in active or inactive mode. That
way I don't need to keep googling every author I'm interested in, then
keep searching for upcoming titles until they show up in the library
catalogue, and perhaps the library would have better
data on interest in upcoming titles.
If this is all too complicated, maybe the library could just send
out automated email alerts when a new title from an author or series you
subscribe to has been added to the catalogue, and users could add it to
their holds list themselves.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Things They Should Invent: computer program for choosing condo finishes
Apparently the way you choose finishes for your new condo is you actually go to a place and look at swatches and choose them that way.
That's so 20th century!
They need instead a computer simulation where you can click on each finish and see what it would look like in your actual unit. You could view different combinations at a click of a mouse, save them and revisit them later, and even share them.
In my particular case, nearly everyone I've ever met is inexplicably enthusiastic about the possibility of choosing finishes, so I was giving very serious consideration to crowd-sourcing the whole thing. (The part of my brain that finds randomness satisfying would appreciate that.) Unfortunately, that's not very feasible if you have to make an appointment and be at a specific place at a specific time. However, if everyone could log in to a website and save their preferences, I could choose my finishes by pure democracy, or have everyone put together a look they like best, or have everyone put together a look and then put it to a general vote to pick the best look.
If this were sharable by social media, it could even help create buzz for the condo builder - people might start tweeting and facebooking their gorgeous future kitchens. Plus, it would certainly be more affordable to build a real-life version of the Sims' build function (maybe it could even be done IN the Sims' build function?) than to rent and staff physical space for people to go look at swatches for every single condo a given developer builds.
That's so 20th century!
They need instead a computer simulation where you can click on each finish and see what it would look like in your actual unit. You could view different combinations at a click of a mouse, save them and revisit them later, and even share them.
In my particular case, nearly everyone I've ever met is inexplicably enthusiastic about the possibility of choosing finishes, so I was giving very serious consideration to crowd-sourcing the whole thing. (The part of my brain that finds randomness satisfying would appreciate that.) Unfortunately, that's not very feasible if you have to make an appointment and be at a specific place at a specific time. However, if everyone could log in to a website and save their preferences, I could choose my finishes by pure democracy, or have everyone put together a look they like best, or have everyone put together a look and then put it to a general vote to pick the best look.
If this were sharable by social media, it could even help create buzz for the condo builder - people might start tweeting and facebooking their gorgeous future kitchens. Plus, it would certainly be more affordable to build a real-life version of the Sims' build function (maybe it could even be done IN the Sims' build function?) than to rent and staff physical space for people to go look at swatches for every single condo a given developer builds.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Coping tips for a young introvert
From a recent Dear Prudence chat:
In addition to Prudie's answer, I have some ideas:
- First of all, don't worry about the fact that she's fading into the background! That's not a problem. She doesn't need to be the star. She's there, she's doing her duty, she's not being rude to anyone, that's sufficient. Work with her on managing the situation so she doesn't get overly drained and melt down, work on giving her options for respites and recharging, protect and advocate for her within the family, but don't worry that she isn't the star of the family dinner table. Civil and emotionally neutral is sufficient.
- In terms of specific strategies, is there a job she could do that would take her away from everyone else? A dog that needs walking? A sleeping baby that needs to be checked on? Something that needs to be fetched from the garage?
- Is it possible for her to spend a small amount of time (like 10 minutes) in the car alone while everyone else is in the house? You could have a code "I need to get something out of the car", give her the keys, and let her get in the back and decompress. If anyone comes out to check on her, she could be rummaging through a bag that's in the car. (Besides, anyone who catches an 11-year-old girl secretively getting something out of the car is just going to assume that she got her period.)
- Set a schedule, tell her what it is, and stick to it. "We're going to Auntie Em's for dinner at 6, and we'll leave by 10." It's much more bearable when you know when it's going to end.
- If the house is big enough to have multiple bathrooms, when she needs a break she could use the upstairs bathroom. The two-storey suburban houses in my family have a small powder room downstairs, and a full bathroom upstairs that's the family's primary bathroom (for showering, brushing teeth, etc.) but isn't in any of the bedrooms. (There's often also an ensuite in the master bedroom.) Usually guests use the downstairs bathroom, but when there's a lot of people in the house and it's family, you might use the upstairs bathroom if the downstairs bathroom is occupied. This would be quieter and give you a moment alone. You can pretty much stay in there until you hear someone coming up the stairs, and then you have the excuse "Oh, the downstairs bathroom was occupied and I couldn't wait." (Again, they'll just assume that she got her period.)
- If there is an unoccupied "public" room of the house (i.e. not someone's bedroom), she could go hang out there and, if someone comes and asks her what she's doing, she could say "Oh, I was just admiring this picture on the wall. What's the story behind it?" Practise plausible scripts with her, so she can turn being "caught" being alone into a pleasant sociable conversation-starter.
- If the trip involves overnight stays, can you stay in a hotel rather than with relatives? Since the letter mentions the introvert daughter as having "brothers", that would mean she's the only girl, so she should at least be able to get her own bed. If you can manage a suite instead of a room, maybe she could get her own room (girls going through puberty do start needing privacy from their brothers, after all), or sleep alone in the living-room area of the suite. If you have to stay with relatives, think about how to give her her own space to sleep. Maybe she'd prefer sleeping on the couch in the den rather than on her cousin's floor?
- Can you host, maybe every other year or so? That would spare your daughter the driving time and give her the option of retreating to her own room.
- Does she have a smartphone? (Or will she within the next couple of years?) Since she likes to read, maybe she could put an ebook reader app on her phone, and, when she gets a chance to duck into a quiet room, read that way. It gives the appearance that she's just sending a quick text or something, whereas sitting with an actual book implies that you've settled in for a while. People might still think she's rude for ducking into another room and texting during a family event, but I think if she can give the impression that she's just finishing up when someone notices her, it shouldn't go over too badly.
- Try to give her at least one day off during the weekend. I always find going straight from an action-packed weekend to a full week of work (or, worse, school) is practically unbearable. I need at least one day to sleep in and lounge around at home doing nothing. If it's not possible to have a day off during the weekend, maybe let her stay home "sick" on the first day back. (You could tell her brothers she really is sick if they're likely to want a free sick day too. Again, they'll just assume she has her period.)
- Depending on the personalities involved, you might consider strategically outing her as an introvert to key family members. Don't make it a big "We need to talk" with undertones of shamefulness. Break the news with enthusiasm for the revelation and sympathy for your daughter. "I was just reading this book, and I realized that Daughter is an introvert. You know how we love seeing the whole family over the holidays and get energized and recharged from it? Turns out all this time this has been draining to her, poor kid!" If one key member of each household you're visiting is aware of her needs (and isn't going to use this information to give her shit), maybe they can help with things like letting her walk the dog or giving her more private sleeping arrangements, or at the very least not meddle and nag if they ever spot her catching a moment's privacy.
- Prudie recommends the book Quiet by Susan Cain. It is useful, bit I found Introvert Advantage by Marti Olsen Laney even more useful. It includes a technical (but understandable) description of the neurology behind introversion, and specific strategies for introverts in extroverted families.
Hi Prudie, My family is rather large (45 people on average for Thanksgiving) and my husband's parents are divorced and we try to see both of them at some point over the weekend. Our kids are 13, 11, and eight and in the past have seemed to enjoy spending the holiday weekend this way. Yesterday my 11-year-old daughter told me that she wants a "quiet" holiday. We have noticed that she is getting increasingly introverted over the past year or so, more likely to read by herself than play with her brothers and cousins. She told me that there are "too many people and too much driving." My husband and I are party-loving extroverts, so house hopping and driving six+ hours over the weekend is no big deal to us. But my daughter doesn't complain often and I know if she brings something up it is legitimately important to her. In small groups, and especially one-on-one, my daughter is a delight: creative, funny, and very smart. But in big groups she just fades into the background, possibly counting down the minutes until she can read by herself again. How do I balance my daughter's request that we tone things down with a) reasonable expectations from family to see us, b) the rest of my immediate family's love of going all-out, and c) not making the holiday all about her. My daughter's personality is so different from the rest of us that I don't know how to meet everybody's needs at once. Any advice? Any introverts want to chime in?
In addition to Prudie's answer, I have some ideas:
- First of all, don't worry about the fact that she's fading into the background! That's not a problem. She doesn't need to be the star. She's there, she's doing her duty, she's not being rude to anyone, that's sufficient. Work with her on managing the situation so she doesn't get overly drained and melt down, work on giving her options for respites and recharging, protect and advocate for her within the family, but don't worry that she isn't the star of the family dinner table. Civil and emotionally neutral is sufficient.
- In terms of specific strategies, is there a job she could do that would take her away from everyone else? A dog that needs walking? A sleeping baby that needs to be checked on? Something that needs to be fetched from the garage?
- Is it possible for her to spend a small amount of time (like 10 minutes) in the car alone while everyone else is in the house? You could have a code "I need to get something out of the car", give her the keys, and let her get in the back and decompress. If anyone comes out to check on her, she could be rummaging through a bag that's in the car. (Besides, anyone who catches an 11-year-old girl secretively getting something out of the car is just going to assume that she got her period.)
- Set a schedule, tell her what it is, and stick to it. "We're going to Auntie Em's for dinner at 6, and we'll leave by 10." It's much more bearable when you know when it's going to end.
- If the house is big enough to have multiple bathrooms, when she needs a break she could use the upstairs bathroom. The two-storey suburban houses in my family have a small powder room downstairs, and a full bathroom upstairs that's the family's primary bathroom (for showering, brushing teeth, etc.) but isn't in any of the bedrooms. (There's often also an ensuite in the master bedroom.) Usually guests use the downstairs bathroom, but when there's a lot of people in the house and it's family, you might use the upstairs bathroom if the downstairs bathroom is occupied. This would be quieter and give you a moment alone. You can pretty much stay in there until you hear someone coming up the stairs, and then you have the excuse "Oh, the downstairs bathroom was occupied and I couldn't wait." (Again, they'll just assume that she got her period.)
- If there is an unoccupied "public" room of the house (i.e. not someone's bedroom), she could go hang out there and, if someone comes and asks her what she's doing, she could say "Oh, I was just admiring this picture on the wall. What's the story behind it?" Practise plausible scripts with her, so she can turn being "caught" being alone into a pleasant sociable conversation-starter.
- If the trip involves overnight stays, can you stay in a hotel rather than with relatives? Since the letter mentions the introvert daughter as having "brothers", that would mean she's the only girl, so she should at least be able to get her own bed. If you can manage a suite instead of a room, maybe she could get her own room (girls going through puberty do start needing privacy from their brothers, after all), or sleep alone in the living-room area of the suite. If you have to stay with relatives, think about how to give her her own space to sleep. Maybe she'd prefer sleeping on the couch in the den rather than on her cousin's floor?
- Can you host, maybe every other year or so? That would spare your daughter the driving time and give her the option of retreating to her own room.
- Does she have a smartphone? (Or will she within the next couple of years?) Since she likes to read, maybe she could put an ebook reader app on her phone, and, when she gets a chance to duck into a quiet room, read that way. It gives the appearance that she's just sending a quick text or something, whereas sitting with an actual book implies that you've settled in for a while. People might still think she's rude for ducking into another room and texting during a family event, but I think if she can give the impression that she's just finishing up when someone notices her, it shouldn't go over too badly.
- Try to give her at least one day off during the weekend. I always find going straight from an action-packed weekend to a full week of work (or, worse, school) is practically unbearable. I need at least one day to sleep in and lounge around at home doing nothing. If it's not possible to have a day off during the weekend, maybe let her stay home "sick" on the first day back. (You could tell her brothers she really is sick if they're likely to want a free sick day too. Again, they'll just assume she has her period.)
- Depending on the personalities involved, you might consider strategically outing her as an introvert to key family members. Don't make it a big "We need to talk" with undertones of shamefulness. Break the news with enthusiasm for the revelation and sympathy for your daughter. "I was just reading this book, and I realized that Daughter is an introvert. You know how we love seeing the whole family over the holidays and get energized and recharged from it? Turns out all this time this has been draining to her, poor kid!" If one key member of each household you're visiting is aware of her needs (and isn't going to use this information to give her shit), maybe they can help with things like letting her walk the dog or giving her more private sleeping arrangements, or at the very least not meddle and nag if they ever spot her catching a moment's privacy.
- Prudie recommends the book Quiet by Susan Cain. It is useful, bit I found Introvert Advantage by Marti Olsen Laney even more useful. It includes a technical (but understandable) description of the neurology behind introversion, and specific strategies for introverts in extroverted families.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Journalism wanted: how can people who find themselves in Amanda Todd's position get their tormenters in trouble without getting themselves in trouble?
Amanda Todd was coerced into exposing herself on a webcam when she was 12 years old. She was a legal minor and she was below the age of consent, so surely that was illegal on the part of the coercer. And, of course, having the pictures in his possession would have counted as possessing child pornography.
Then, when she was 15, someone tried to convince her to expose herself again, threatening to distribute her previous pictures if she didn't. Blackmail is illegal (it's covered in the Criminal Code under "Extortion"), plus he was trying to coerce someone who is underage and under the age of consent to appear in child pornography, and threatening to distribute child pornography if she didn't comply.
It sounds like it should have been quite easy to report the blackmailer to police and put an end to Ms. Todd's troubles.
However, according to the story, the police knocked on Ms. Todd's door at 4 a.m. to tell her that her photo had been distributed.
If I were a teen in Ms. Todd's position, that fact alone would be disincentive to going to the police. The knock at the door at 4 a.m. would lead me to conclude that I couldn't expect the police to have compassion for me as a victim. (At the absolute bare minimum, if the victim doesn't yet know they're a victim, why not do them the small decency of letting them get a full night's sleep?) It would lead me to conclude that the police wouldn't care about protecting me from the wrath of my parents (because a 4 a.m. knock at the door would result in my parents being tired and cranky and frightened, which would mean emotions are running high), which could be a reason to actively avoid police involvement if I had abusive parents.
Therefore, I think it would be helpful if some of the media coverage told teens in Ms. Todd's position how they could get help without getting into trouble. Can you report it to the police without involving your parents? Can they investigate it if you report it anonymously through Crime Stoppers? What kind of evidence do they need? Screen shots? How can you avoid the 4 a.m. knock on the door?
Similarly, what should you do if you're an adult and a kid comes to you with this kind of problem? How can you get the perp in trouble while minimizing the awkwardness and humiliation to the kid?
I also think, if they haven't done so already, the police should come up with a way for minor victims to report their victimization without the involvement of their parents, if they prefer not to involve their parents. Victim Services counsellors should also be trained and available to help minor victims tell their parents if they want, but parent-free reporting should still be possible. And if it turns out that it is in fact possible to report that you've been a victim of a crime without involving your parents, police and media need to publicize this fact and give specifics.
Then, when she was 15, someone tried to convince her to expose herself again, threatening to distribute her previous pictures if she didn't. Blackmail is illegal (it's covered in the Criminal Code under "Extortion"), plus he was trying to coerce someone who is underage and under the age of consent to appear in child pornography, and threatening to distribute child pornography if she didn't comply.
It sounds like it should have been quite easy to report the blackmailer to police and put an end to Ms. Todd's troubles.
However, according to the story, the police knocked on Ms. Todd's door at 4 a.m. to tell her that her photo had been distributed.
If I were a teen in Ms. Todd's position, that fact alone would be disincentive to going to the police. The knock at the door at 4 a.m. would lead me to conclude that I couldn't expect the police to have compassion for me as a victim. (At the absolute bare minimum, if the victim doesn't yet know they're a victim, why not do them the small decency of letting them get a full night's sleep?) It would lead me to conclude that the police wouldn't care about protecting me from the wrath of my parents (because a 4 a.m. knock at the door would result in my parents being tired and cranky and frightened, which would mean emotions are running high), which could be a reason to actively avoid police involvement if I had abusive parents.
Therefore, I think it would be helpful if some of the media coverage told teens in Ms. Todd's position how they could get help without getting into trouble. Can you report it to the police without involving your parents? Can they investigate it if you report it anonymously through Crime Stoppers? What kind of evidence do they need? Screen shots? How can you avoid the 4 a.m. knock on the door?
Similarly, what should you do if you're an adult and a kid comes to you with this kind of problem? How can you get the perp in trouble while minimizing the awkwardness and humiliation to the kid?
I also think, if they haven't done so already, the police should come up with a way for minor victims to report their victimization without the involvement of their parents, if they prefer not to involve their parents. Victim Services counsellors should also be trained and available to help minor victims tell their parents if they want, but parent-free reporting should still be possible. And if it turns out that it is in fact possible to report that you've been a victim of a crime without involving your parents, police and media need to publicize this fact and give specifics.
Tuesday, October 02, 2012
How to conduct a garbage audit for plastic bags
From time to time, news coverage of discussions of plastic bags contains the results of various garbage audits, where they look at a sample of garbage and see how many plastic bags are in it. These numbers are often used to support the author's thesis about which measures do and don't help, but I find that the garbage audits I see cited tend to be less thorough - and therefore less useful - than they need to be.
Here are the questions a plastic bag garbage audit needs to answer in order to be truly informative:
- How many shopping bags are being used as garbage bags? These would likely be replaced with garbage bags if shopping bags were banned, and therefore would not be eliminated from the total landfill plastic.
- How many garbage bags are there in total (including shopping bags being used as garbage bags)? If the audit counts shopping bags being used as garbage bags, it also needs to count garbage bags being used as garbage bags. If there's a reduction in the number of shopping bags but a corresponding increase in the number of garbage bags, banning shopping bags didn't change anything.
- How full are the garbage bags? I empty my kitchen garbage every day, for a minimum of 365 garbage bags a year. They aren't always full, I just don't leave food waste overnight for sanitary reasons. If a significant percentage of garbage bags aren't full, the smaller shopping bags would actually be a better choice because there would be less plastic.
- What is the total quantity of plastic? Remember how plastic grocery bags got bigger when they introduced the five cent fee? Suppose I was using 400 bags a year for my garbage before they got bigger (because I occasionally have more than one bag of garbage). Then suppose the new, bigger bags are always big enough for my garbage needs, so I'm using 365 a year. If the new ones are 20% bigger, that's actually the equivalent of 438 of the old bags, so I'm throwing out more plastic. If, in the future, I'm forced to use the even-larger kitchen catchers, that's even more plastic being thrown out.
- How many plastic bags are in the recycling stream? Sometime after we started talking about plastic bags, I became aware that plastic bags are recyclable. I don't know offhand if they first became recyclable then or if they were already recyclable and I just found out then, but the fact of the matter is that awareness of their recyclability has increased in recent years. If there are, say, 100 fewer bags in the landfill but 100 more bags in recycling, nothing has changed in terms of what we throw out. Obviously it's better for things to be recycled than to go in the landfill, but you can't claim a reduction in usage if the same things are just being recycled now.
- What is the condition of plastic bags that are in the landfill or recycling but not being used as garbage bags? I have heard some people complain that they hate plastic bags because they rip. This is not my experience. However, regardless, it would be informative to see how many of the plastic bags not being used as garbage bags have ripped. If, for example, 87% of the thrown-out bags have ripped, that suggests we have a high reuse rate and people aren't throwing them out as trash unless they can't be reused normally. It might be worth investigating whether it would be more efficient to manufacture higher-quality bags. (Obviously they take up more resources to manufacture and have more plastic in them so there's a tipping point in here somewhere, but it should be looked into if it turns out to be applicable.)
Here are the questions a plastic bag garbage audit needs to answer in order to be truly informative:
- How many shopping bags are being used as garbage bags? These would likely be replaced with garbage bags if shopping bags were banned, and therefore would not be eliminated from the total landfill plastic.
- How many garbage bags are there in total (including shopping bags being used as garbage bags)? If the audit counts shopping bags being used as garbage bags, it also needs to count garbage bags being used as garbage bags. If there's a reduction in the number of shopping bags but a corresponding increase in the number of garbage bags, banning shopping bags didn't change anything.
- How full are the garbage bags? I empty my kitchen garbage every day, for a minimum of 365 garbage bags a year. They aren't always full, I just don't leave food waste overnight for sanitary reasons. If a significant percentage of garbage bags aren't full, the smaller shopping bags would actually be a better choice because there would be less plastic.
- What is the total quantity of plastic? Remember how plastic grocery bags got bigger when they introduced the five cent fee? Suppose I was using 400 bags a year for my garbage before they got bigger (because I occasionally have more than one bag of garbage). Then suppose the new, bigger bags are always big enough for my garbage needs, so I'm using 365 a year. If the new ones are 20% bigger, that's actually the equivalent of 438 of the old bags, so I'm throwing out more plastic. If, in the future, I'm forced to use the even-larger kitchen catchers, that's even more plastic being thrown out.
- How many plastic bags are in the recycling stream? Sometime after we started talking about plastic bags, I became aware that plastic bags are recyclable. I don't know offhand if they first became recyclable then or if they were already recyclable and I just found out then, but the fact of the matter is that awareness of their recyclability has increased in recent years. If there are, say, 100 fewer bags in the landfill but 100 more bags in recycling, nothing has changed in terms of what we throw out. Obviously it's better for things to be recycled than to go in the landfill, but you can't claim a reduction in usage if the same things are just being recycled now.
- What is the condition of plastic bags that are in the landfill or recycling but not being used as garbage bags? I have heard some people complain that they hate plastic bags because they rip. This is not my experience. However, regardless, it would be informative to see how many of the plastic bags not being used as garbage bags have ripped. If, for example, 87% of the thrown-out bags have ripped, that suggests we have a high reuse rate and people aren't throwing them out as trash unless they can't be reused normally. It might be worth investigating whether it would be more efficient to manufacture higher-quality bags. (Obviously they take up more resources to manufacture and have more plastic in them so there's a tipping point in here somewhere, but it should be looked into if it turns out to be applicable.)
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Solving ethical dilemmas with helpful kitchen tips
I recently had a party and afterward had quite a few large bottles of leftover wine (they were opened and wouldn’t keep). There is a particular corner in my neighborhood where benign “drunkards” hang out and drink. They have done so for years, and everyone accepts this as part of our neighborhood. My question is, Should I drop this mother lode of wine off on their perch for them (because who am I to judge their choices?), or pour it down the drain (which would be a “waste”)?
Solution: pour the wine into ice cube trays and put them in the freezer. Then you can defrost it in easy and manageable portions next time you want wine. If the wine is red and the idea of drinking red wine that has been cold offends your delicate sensibilities, you can use it to make sangria. (Or to cook, of course, but I'd assume that people who are savvy enough to cook with wine would already do so as a solution to leftover wine.)
Sunday, April 29, 2012
How to cool the Ontario housing market without hurting ordinary people
Recently in the news: Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney wants to cool the housing market.
This made me think of subsection 6(2) of the Ontario Residential Tenancies Act, which states:
So to cool the housing market, they should either remove this exemption, or place a time limit on it like there was in 1992.
From the point of view of an ordinary person hoping to break into the housing market simply to purchase a place to live in, the problem with the housing market is investors. They have lots of money and go in buying up condos en masse to rent out and perhaps later flip, taking them away from those of us who need to be prudent and evaluate a unit from the perspective of "How would I feel about pouring my life's savings into this and living here for the rest of my life?"
If the exemption from the guideline rent increase is eliminated, rental properties will be less attractive investments. It wouldn't make them completely unattractive investments, but a limit in how much you can increase rent where no such limit existed before should cool the market a bit by making investors more cautious.
But this will not make condos any less appealing to ordinary buyers looking for a home for themselves. It will simply take some of the investors out of the market and leave more units for the rest of us.
It will also have the advantage of improving long-term affordability of newer (and therefore better-quality and more energy-efficient) rental housing, thereby making better housing more accessible for everyone.
This made me think of subsection 6(2) of the Ontario Residential Tenancies Act, which states:
(2) Sections 104, 111, 112, 120, 121, 122, 126 to 133, 165 and 167 do not apply with respect to a rental unit if,Section 120 of the ORTA applies to the guideline rent increase, which means that properties that were built or started being rented out after 1998/1975/1991 (as applicable) are exempt from the rent increase guideline, and the landlords can raise the rent by however much they want.
(a) it was not occupied for any purpose before June 17, 1998;(b) it is a rental unit no part of which has been previously rented since July 29, 1975; or(c) no part of the building, mobile home park or land lease community was occupied for residential purposes before November 1, 1991. 2006, c. 17, s. 6 (2).
So to cool the housing market, they should either remove this exemption, or place a time limit on it like there was in 1992.
From the point of view of an ordinary person hoping to break into the housing market simply to purchase a place to live in, the problem with the housing market is investors. They have lots of money and go in buying up condos en masse to rent out and perhaps later flip, taking them away from those of us who need to be prudent and evaluate a unit from the perspective of "How would I feel about pouring my life's savings into this and living here for the rest of my life?"
If the exemption from the guideline rent increase is eliminated, rental properties will be less attractive investments. It wouldn't make them completely unattractive investments, but a limit in how much you can increase rent where no such limit existed before should cool the market a bit by making investors more cautious.
But this will not make condos any less appealing to ordinary buyers looking for a home for themselves. It will simply take some of the investors out of the market and leave more units for the rest of us.
It will also have the advantage of improving long-term affordability of newer (and therefore better-quality and more energy-efficient) rental housing, thereby making better housing more accessible for everyone.
Sunday, April 01, 2012
How to teach literary analysis: don't let students read ahead
As I've blogged about before, I hated and was terrible at literary analysis when I was in school. Despite getting respectable grades in lit classes in three languages, I just didn't feel that analysis added anything to the reading experience or understand what on earth it achieves apart from giving us fodder for academic essays. I'm done the story, why dissect it so tediously?
I didn't start to truly grok literary analysis until I entered the Harry Potter fandom. I started reading Harry Potter shortly before the fifth book, and people on fan sites were using literary analysis to figure out what would happen later in the series. That made far better sense to me: we're looking for clues to solve a mystery!
Back in school, as a diligent student and a voracious reader, I'd always read ahead in the books we were studying. But my Harry Potter experience made me realize that this actually made learning how to do literary analysis more difficult for me. I'd be far ahead of the chapter we were discussing in class and simply wouldn't care about dissecting it, I was more interested in finding out what would happen next. Or I might even be finished the book and on to the next while we're still discussing the early chapters, at which point I most often simply didn't care. I'm done the story, let's move on!
But in my Harry Potter fandom, we couldn't move on - the books we needed to move on hadn't been written yet! So we'd analyze instead. And it was fun! It was my happy place for years!
So how could this be duplicated in the classroom, to not only teach literary analysis but convey the purpose and pleasure of it?
My idea: don't let the students read ahead. Earlier on, in grades 9 and 10, this could take the form of not allowing the books to leave the classroom, and doing the actual reading (or perhaps listening to an audiobook and reading along) in the classroom as part of class time. Then, at the end of every chapter or at every logical break, go over discussion questions that are geared towards using analysis to figure out what happens next. The teacher would have to make it clear that you don't get points for guessing or knowing what will happen next, but rather for having a logical analysis. A thesis that turns out to be factually incorrect but is impeccably argued with the information on hand should get just as many points as a thesis that perfectly predicts the outcome. (This is a problem I had in school - some teachers liked it when departed from the standard interpretation and backed it up with cited evidence, but other teachers docked points for not coming up with the standard interpretation.) Once they've finished the book, the teacher could go back over what clues in the book should have made it possible to guess what was going to happen.
After doing one or two books manually in the classroom so students can learn what they're looking for, they wouldn't have to do all the actual reading in the classroom. Instead, they could move to a system where you simply have to answer some questions at the end of each chapter before reading the next one. This could even be achieved electronically - answer the questions on an online form that emails the answers directly to the teacher, and doing so unlocks the next chapter. This would enable diligent students and those who are enthusiastic about the subject matter to work ahead at their own pace rather than being held back by their peers. (I didn't have this option in high school. While I had the book and could read ahead - and, being a diligent student, did so - I had no idea what we'd be discussing in class so I couldn't keep an eye out for it. Then I had to go back over something I'd already read to look for symbolism etc., which made an already uninteresting process outright tedious.)
If they do this with several books over a period of years, gradually loosening restrictions on reading ahead, by the end of high school the students should get to a place where they're automatically noticing and questioning the right things as they read through, the same way that people notice clues and try to guess whodunnit when reading a mystery novel.
I know that literary analysis is not limited to figuring out what's going to happen, but focusing on what's going to happen next makes the subject matter far more interesting, relevant and compelling to those who aren't already interested. "Remus and Tonks are totally going to hook up - look at all the parallels in the scenes where they were introduced to Harry!" is far more interesting than "Let's compare and contrast the scenes where the supporting characters were introduced to Harry." It's the English-class equivalent of using casino games to teach concepts in stats class.
I didn't start to truly grok literary analysis until I entered the Harry Potter fandom. I started reading Harry Potter shortly before the fifth book, and people on fan sites were using literary analysis to figure out what would happen later in the series. That made far better sense to me: we're looking for clues to solve a mystery!
Back in school, as a diligent student and a voracious reader, I'd always read ahead in the books we were studying. But my Harry Potter experience made me realize that this actually made learning how to do literary analysis more difficult for me. I'd be far ahead of the chapter we were discussing in class and simply wouldn't care about dissecting it, I was more interested in finding out what would happen next. Or I might even be finished the book and on to the next while we're still discussing the early chapters, at which point I most often simply didn't care. I'm done the story, let's move on!
But in my Harry Potter fandom, we couldn't move on - the books we needed to move on hadn't been written yet! So we'd analyze instead. And it was fun! It was my happy place for years!
So how could this be duplicated in the classroom, to not only teach literary analysis but convey the purpose and pleasure of it?
My idea: don't let the students read ahead. Earlier on, in grades 9 and 10, this could take the form of not allowing the books to leave the classroom, and doing the actual reading (or perhaps listening to an audiobook and reading along) in the classroom as part of class time. Then, at the end of every chapter or at every logical break, go over discussion questions that are geared towards using analysis to figure out what happens next. The teacher would have to make it clear that you don't get points for guessing or knowing what will happen next, but rather for having a logical analysis. A thesis that turns out to be factually incorrect but is impeccably argued with the information on hand should get just as many points as a thesis that perfectly predicts the outcome. (This is a problem I had in school - some teachers liked it when departed from the standard interpretation and backed it up with cited evidence, but other teachers docked points for not coming up with the standard interpretation.) Once they've finished the book, the teacher could go back over what clues in the book should have made it possible to guess what was going to happen.
After doing one or two books manually in the classroom so students can learn what they're looking for, they wouldn't have to do all the actual reading in the classroom. Instead, they could move to a system where you simply have to answer some questions at the end of each chapter before reading the next one. This could even be achieved electronically - answer the questions on an online form that emails the answers directly to the teacher, and doing so unlocks the next chapter. This would enable diligent students and those who are enthusiastic about the subject matter to work ahead at their own pace rather than being held back by their peers. (I didn't have this option in high school. While I had the book and could read ahead - and, being a diligent student, did so - I had no idea what we'd be discussing in class so I couldn't keep an eye out for it. Then I had to go back over something I'd already read to look for symbolism etc., which made an already uninteresting process outright tedious.)
If they do this with several books over a period of years, gradually loosening restrictions on reading ahead, by the end of high school the students should get to a place where they're automatically noticing and questioning the right things as they read through, the same way that people notice clues and try to guess whodunnit when reading a mystery novel.
I know that literary analysis is not limited to figuring out what's going to happen, but focusing on what's going to happen next makes the subject matter far more interesting, relevant and compelling to those who aren't already interested. "Remus and Tonks are totally going to hook up - look at all the parallels in the scenes where they were introduced to Harry!" is far more interesting than "Let's compare and contrast the scenes where the supporting characters were introduced to Harry." It's the English-class equivalent of using casino games to teach concepts in stats class.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
What Facebook should do about employers who demand prospective employees' Facebook passwords
Facebook should put a clause on their terms of service stating that users may not share their password with anyone else without first informing Facebook that they intend to do so. They should create a special form you can fill out for the express purpose of informing Facebook that you intent to share your password with someone. This form should request enough data that Facebook will be able to find that individual's Facebook account.
Then Facebook should use this information to either a) ban all employers reported through this mechanism, or b) set all their privacy to the lowest possible setting without the option of raising it back up.
Fair warning would be set out in the terms of service ("By using this service, you agree to.."), and they could use selective publicity to very loudly announce that you have to report to Facebook if your employer requests your password while being more discreet about the consequences for the employer. Facebook already has a reputation for changing privacy settings and terms of service on its users, so it may as well use this precedent for good.
Then Facebook should use this information to either a) ban all employers reported through this mechanism, or b) set all their privacy to the lowest possible setting without the option of raising it back up.
Fair warning would be set out in the terms of service ("By using this service, you agree to.."), and they could use selective publicity to very loudly announce that you have to report to Facebook if your employer requests your password while being more discreet about the consequences for the employer. Facebook already has a reputation for changing privacy settings and terms of service on its users, so it may as well use this precedent for good.
Sunday, March 04, 2012
What if you could join other people's pension plans?
Given the trend away from defined-benefit pension plans and the resentment by some people who don't have defined-benefit plans to those who do, I wonder if it would be possible to create a mechanism for anyone to join any existing pension plan.
Outside members would pay in however much they wanted to (and perhaps could use the contributions from their defined-contribution plans), and get returns commensurate with those contributions on the same scale as employee members. They'd be charged a management fee for this (akin to mutual funds), which would cover the cost of administering their membership plus a small profit. The employer would not pay anything towards the outside members, of course, they'd just be along for the ride.
Here's an example of how it would work, using numbers that make the math easy and don't reflect the ratios of actual pension plans:
An employee of Acme Inc. who earns $50,000 a year contributes $5,000 a year to the pension plan and the employer also contributes $5,000 a year to the pension plan, for a total of $10,000 in contributions a year. The employee then gets a pension of $1,000 a year for each year of service when they turn 65. So if they have 35 years of service, they get a pension of $35,000 a year.
If an outsider joins the Acme Inc. pension plan and contributes $10,000 a year for 35 years (plus the management fee), they'll also get a pension of $35,000 a year when they turn 65. If they choose to contribute only the $5,000 that the employee would be paying in, they'd get a pension of $17,500. If they choose to contribute $20,000, they'd get a pension of $70,000.
Possible variations: employees can also choose to pay more in and get a bigger benefit. So if the employee in the first example chooses to pay in $10,000 instead of $5,000, the employer would still pay in the same $5,000 for a total contribution of $15,000, and, after 35 years, a pension of $52,500.
This would be advantageous for everyone who doesn't have a defined benefit pension plan, because they could buy into a professionally-managed pension plan instead of having to figure out how to manage their retirement planning themselves.
It has the potential to be slightly advantageous for the employees, because they have more money being paid into their pension plan, plus they have outsiders who are now invested in not cutting back their pension plan. If they're public sector, they also have the advantage of less resentment from the public, because anyone can just join in.
It has the potential to be slightly advantageous for the employer, because they would be making a small additional profit from the management fees. In addition, people would be more likely to seek out pension stability during difficult economic times, and work tends to slow down during difficult economic times, so the employer would get this extra income (and a bit of extra work processing applications for its employees) when things slow down. The employer would also be seen to be providing a valuable public service and could probably swing some tax writeoffs from their pension management expenditures (if there isn't already some provision for that, it seems like the sort of thing that would be implemented shortly after joining other pensions became possible.)
It would be advantageous for the plan itself, since there are more investment opportunities and better rates if you have more money to invest.
It would be advantageous for employees who are downsized from the employer, since they'd have the option to keep building up their pension even if they can't find equally pensionable work.
And it would be advantageous for all workers everywhere, because it would lessen the idea (among those very loud people who have this idea) that providing a defined-benefit pension is wasteful and irrational, and call the bluff of people who think that it shouldn't be provided to some workers because it isn't provided to all workers.
Potential pitfall: it might dissuade employers from providing new defined benefit plans.
Potential mitigation: a) Is anyone even providing new defined benefit plans? b) Would it matter if you could just buy into an existing plan?
Potential pitfall: Would it give outsiders control over the plan? I've read that some employers won't let the employee proportion of the contributions exceed 50% (even when they employees offer to pay more to keep the plan afloat, the employer says no) because that would mean they'd have to turn control of the plan over to the employees.
Potential solution: Outsiders sign a contract saying they don't get a share of control over the plan, they're just along for the ride.
Outside members would pay in however much they wanted to (and perhaps could use the contributions from their defined-contribution plans), and get returns commensurate with those contributions on the same scale as employee members. They'd be charged a management fee for this (akin to mutual funds), which would cover the cost of administering their membership plus a small profit. The employer would not pay anything towards the outside members, of course, they'd just be along for the ride.
Here's an example of how it would work, using numbers that make the math easy and don't reflect the ratios of actual pension plans:
An employee of Acme Inc. who earns $50,000 a year contributes $5,000 a year to the pension plan and the employer also contributes $5,000 a year to the pension plan, for a total of $10,000 in contributions a year. The employee then gets a pension of $1,000 a year for each year of service when they turn 65. So if they have 35 years of service, they get a pension of $35,000 a year.
If an outsider joins the Acme Inc. pension plan and contributes $10,000 a year for 35 years (plus the management fee), they'll also get a pension of $35,000 a year when they turn 65. If they choose to contribute only the $5,000 that the employee would be paying in, they'd get a pension of $17,500. If they choose to contribute $20,000, they'd get a pension of $70,000.
Possible variations: employees can also choose to pay more in and get a bigger benefit. So if the employee in the first example chooses to pay in $10,000 instead of $5,000, the employer would still pay in the same $5,000 for a total contribution of $15,000, and, after 35 years, a pension of $52,500.
This would be advantageous for everyone who doesn't have a defined benefit pension plan, because they could buy into a professionally-managed pension plan instead of having to figure out how to manage their retirement planning themselves.
It has the potential to be slightly advantageous for the employees, because they have more money being paid into their pension plan, plus they have outsiders who are now invested in not cutting back their pension plan. If they're public sector, they also have the advantage of less resentment from the public, because anyone can just join in.
It has the potential to be slightly advantageous for the employer, because they would be making a small additional profit from the management fees. In addition, people would be more likely to seek out pension stability during difficult economic times, and work tends to slow down during difficult economic times, so the employer would get this extra income (and a bit of extra work processing applications for its employees) when things slow down. The employer would also be seen to be providing a valuable public service and could probably swing some tax writeoffs from their pension management expenditures (if there isn't already some provision for that, it seems like the sort of thing that would be implemented shortly after joining other pensions became possible.)
It would be advantageous for the plan itself, since there are more investment opportunities and better rates if you have more money to invest.
It would be advantageous for employees who are downsized from the employer, since they'd have the option to keep building up their pension even if they can't find equally pensionable work.
And it would be advantageous for all workers everywhere, because it would lessen the idea (among those very loud people who have this idea) that providing a defined-benefit pension is wasteful and irrational, and call the bluff of people who think that it shouldn't be provided to some workers because it isn't provided to all workers.
Potential pitfall: it might dissuade employers from providing new defined benefit plans.
Potential mitigation: a) Is anyone even providing new defined benefit plans? b) Would it matter if you could just buy into an existing plan?
Potential pitfall: Would it give outsiders control over the plan? I've read that some employers won't let the employee proportion of the contributions exceed 50% (even when they employees offer to pay more to keep the plan afloat, the employer says no) because that would mean they'd have to turn control of the plan over to the employees.
Potential solution: Outsiders sign a contract saying they don't get a share of control over the plan, they're just along for the ride.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
How the Levi's ad campaign could have been made to work
I've been reading about the hilarious misfired Levi's ad campaign, and I think I see what they were trying to do and how they could have done it better.
Different people who wear the same size have different builds. For example, some people carry front-to-back, and some people carry side-to-side. Some people have long legs and a short torso, and some people have short legs and a long torso. Some people's hips curve in a smooth and gentle slope from the narrowest point of their waist to where the femur meets the pelvic bone, and some people's hips go straight out to the side at the top of the pelvic bone, slightly back inwards below that where there isn't much going on, then out again where the femur meets the pelvic bone.
I think what Levis was trying to suggest is that these jeans will fit all of these variations, or at least more of them than the average pair of jeans. Which would be useful! And it's possible that the models they use do in fact have these variations in their bone structure. But we can't tell, because of the pose. The pose only highlights their similarities, which makes it laughable.
Here's how they could have done it better:
Get an assortment of people whom the best-selling jeans on the market don't fit well. Make a video of them trying on the best-seller, focusing on the areas where it doesn't fit well. Then show them trying on the new jeans and focus on how they fit better in the problem areas. They could even get several models who all wear the same size jeans but have all different fit problems with the best-seller, and show them each trying on the same single pair of jeans (Ã la Travelling Pants), handing it from one to the next so the viewer can see that they're actually the same pants. If they don't want to show the models in their underwear, they could be in dressing-room booths with neck-to-knee doors.
The print component of the campaign could consist of a series of ads each highlighting one common fit problem, and include a link to a youtube page where you can see them actually putting on the new pants and comparing them with the old pants, to prove they're not photoshopped etc.
Of course, this ad campaign would only work if the pants actually do what they say they do. But if they do, they deserve to be well-advertised. And if they don't but claim they do, they deserve to be an object of ridicule.
Different people who wear the same size have different builds. For example, some people carry front-to-back, and some people carry side-to-side. Some people have long legs and a short torso, and some people have short legs and a long torso. Some people's hips curve in a smooth and gentle slope from the narrowest point of their waist to where the femur meets the pelvic bone, and some people's hips go straight out to the side at the top of the pelvic bone, slightly back inwards below that where there isn't much going on, then out again where the femur meets the pelvic bone.
I think what Levis was trying to suggest is that these jeans will fit all of these variations, or at least more of them than the average pair of jeans. Which would be useful! And it's possible that the models they use do in fact have these variations in their bone structure. But we can't tell, because of the pose. The pose only highlights their similarities, which makes it laughable.
Here's how they could have done it better:
Get an assortment of people whom the best-selling jeans on the market don't fit well. Make a video of them trying on the best-seller, focusing on the areas where it doesn't fit well. Then show them trying on the new jeans and focus on how they fit better in the problem areas. They could even get several models who all wear the same size jeans but have all different fit problems with the best-seller, and show them each trying on the same single pair of jeans (Ã la Travelling Pants), handing it from one to the next so the viewer can see that they're actually the same pants. If they don't want to show the models in their underwear, they could be in dressing-room booths with neck-to-knee doors.
The print component of the campaign could consist of a series of ads each highlighting one common fit problem, and include a link to a youtube page where you can see them actually putting on the new pants and comparing them with the old pants, to prove they're not photoshopped etc.
Of course, this ad campaign would only work if the pants actually do what they say they do. But if they do, they deserve to be well-advertised. And if they don't but claim they do, they deserve to be an object of ridicule.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Better spin on the deal-breaker personal ads
I previously came up with the idea of deal-breaker personal ads, and they've been festering in my brain, occasionally being improved.
Today my shower gave me a better way to spin them: call them "Things you need to know before you date me" or something similar. On a website, they wouldn't appear in the initial personal ad, but you would see them before messaging a person. If you find the deal-breakers unappealing, you simply don't message that person.
Today my shower gave me a better way to spin them: call them "Things you need to know before you date me" or something similar. On a website, they wouldn't appear in the initial personal ad, but you would see them before messaging a person. If you find the deal-breakers unappealing, you simply don't message that person.
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Things They Should Invent: career guidance that asks you what DON'T you want to be when you grow up?
At lot of the career advice I received as a child led me to respond "No way! I do NOT want to do that!" The usual response by the grownups around me was to try to convince me that I should be more open-minded about such things, or to try to convince me that I really could do it if I work hard and put my mind to it.
What they really should do when a student is resistant to a particular career path is determine what exactly they don't like about it, and use that information to guide them towards something more suitable.
For example, many adults tried to convince me to go into engineering. If they had thought to ask, I would have told them that I didn't want to go into engineering because you had to make actual things that actually worked. With suitable leading questions, I could have given the example of enrichment workshops where we had to make bridges or rube goldberg machines out of paper and glue and cotton balls and string, and while I had a solid grounding in the necessary theory and some innovative ideas, I found making the things actually function was impossible, and far more frustrating than anything else I faced academically. A knowledgeable teacher or guidance counsellor could then point me towards something that uses the same strengths that lead them to think I'm suitable for engineering, but is less tangible.
Aptitude tests kept giving me a set of possible career paths that included psychologist and clergy person. I didn't want to do either of those because they're such intense people work that need far more emotional intelligence than I have (plus, for the clergy thing, I'm an atheist). My guidance counsellor's next step should have been to look at things that use the same aptitudes, but don't require people skills.
For a time, it was trendy to encourage students to go to college instead of university. While I have nothing against college in principle, college programs train you in a specific career, and none of those career appealed to me. Meanwhile, university programs train you in an academic subject, so I could study something I like and am good at rather than train for a career I find unappealing. For example, college-encouragers would always tell me "You don't have to go to university, you know. You could go to college and do Travel and Tourism! You like languages!" Yes, but I hate travel and tourism! Why would I want to commit at 18 to a career in something I hate rather than spending the next four years studying something I love? In any case, a useful response would have been to either identify college programs that would be more appealing to me, or to recognize that I'm well-suited to university and look for useful programs there.
A student's disinclination towards a particular field is just as informative as their enthusiasm for a particular field, and it shouldn't be written off just because it's negative. Especially when combined with the What can you do better than others? method, asking students what they don't want to do and why could go a long way towards pinpointing the right field for them.
What they really should do when a student is resistant to a particular career path is determine what exactly they don't like about it, and use that information to guide them towards something more suitable.
For example, many adults tried to convince me to go into engineering. If they had thought to ask, I would have told them that I didn't want to go into engineering because you had to make actual things that actually worked. With suitable leading questions, I could have given the example of enrichment workshops where we had to make bridges or rube goldberg machines out of paper and glue and cotton balls and string, and while I had a solid grounding in the necessary theory and some innovative ideas, I found making the things actually function was impossible, and far more frustrating than anything else I faced academically. A knowledgeable teacher or guidance counsellor could then point me towards something that uses the same strengths that lead them to think I'm suitable for engineering, but is less tangible.
Aptitude tests kept giving me a set of possible career paths that included psychologist and clergy person. I didn't want to do either of those because they're such intense people work that need far more emotional intelligence than I have (plus, for the clergy thing, I'm an atheist). My guidance counsellor's next step should have been to look at things that use the same aptitudes, but don't require people skills.
For a time, it was trendy to encourage students to go to college instead of university. While I have nothing against college in principle, college programs train you in a specific career, and none of those career appealed to me. Meanwhile, university programs train you in an academic subject, so I could study something I like and am good at rather than train for a career I find unappealing. For example, college-encouragers would always tell me "You don't have to go to university, you know. You could go to college and do Travel and Tourism! You like languages!" Yes, but I hate travel and tourism! Why would I want to commit at 18 to a career in something I hate rather than spending the next four years studying something I love? In any case, a useful response would have been to either identify college programs that would be more appealing to me, or to recognize that I'm well-suited to university and look for useful programs there.
A student's disinclination towards a particular field is just as informative as their enthusiasm for a particular field, and it shouldn't be written off just because it's negative. Especially when combined with the What can you do better than others? method, asking students what they don't want to do and why could go a long way towards pinpointing the right field for them.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Journalism wanted: why are burqas made from synthetic fibres?
Over the past decade or so, I've read several different articles by different journalists visiting Afghanistan who described their respective experiences wearing a burqa. (Most recently here.) And most, if not all, of these articles mentioned that the burqa was made of some synthetic fibre that doesn't breathe.
How did that come about?
Conventional wisdom is that Afghanistan doesn't have much in the way of infrastructure. A lack of infrastructure should make manufacturing synthetic fabrics difficult, so I would expect people to wear natural fabrics made in traditional ways - whatever it was that people did in the centuries and millennia before industrialization. Synthetic fibres also seem inconvenient for burqas (something that breathes would be better), and more convenient for other things. So why are they using it for burqas? This would suggest that synthetic fibres are more readily available than natural fibres. How did that happen in a country with so little infrastructure?
Obviously not all burqas are made of synthetic fibres. Some of the burqas available for sale on the internet in English are available in cotton and sometimes even silk, although I'm certainly not assuming that what I can google up in English is representative of the general burqa market. I've also seen a number of newspaper articles mentioning in passing (for the purpose of explaining to readers what a burqa is) that they're made of cotton; it's quite possible the people writing these articles have no first-hand experience with burqas or are just repeating what they've googled up. But every article I've read by a journalist who actually wore a burqa in Afghanistan has them describing it as made of synthetic fibres that don't breathe. (Unless they're purposely giving synthetic ones to journalists for some reason?)
There's a story in there somewhere. Even if it turns out to be obvious to those familiar with the Afghan garment industry, there's a story in there for ignorant westerners like me.
How did that come about?
Conventional wisdom is that Afghanistan doesn't have much in the way of infrastructure. A lack of infrastructure should make manufacturing synthetic fabrics difficult, so I would expect people to wear natural fabrics made in traditional ways - whatever it was that people did in the centuries and millennia before industrialization. Synthetic fibres also seem inconvenient for burqas (something that breathes would be better), and more convenient for other things. So why are they using it for burqas? This would suggest that synthetic fibres are more readily available than natural fibres. How did that happen in a country with so little infrastructure?
Obviously not all burqas are made of synthetic fibres. Some of the burqas available for sale on the internet in English are available in cotton and sometimes even silk, although I'm certainly not assuming that what I can google up in English is representative of the general burqa market. I've also seen a number of newspaper articles mentioning in passing (for the purpose of explaining to readers what a burqa is) that they're made of cotton; it's quite possible the people writing these articles have no first-hand experience with burqas or are just repeating what they've googled up. But every article I've read by a journalist who actually wore a burqa in Afghanistan has them describing it as made of synthetic fibres that don't breathe. (Unless they're purposely giving synthetic ones to journalists for some reason?)
There's a story in there somewhere. Even if it turns out to be obvious to those familiar with the Afghan garment industry, there's a story in there for ignorant westerners like me.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
SOPA protest idea
I don't know offhand how technologically feasible this is, but just putting it out there: what if the major sites going dark to protest SOPA instead blocked access to their sites from users at .gov addresses? It seems like it could be done on the same principle as geoblocking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)