Why ‘Honey Boo Boo’s’ Ratings Are No Cause for Alarm (Yet)


Hitting a season high in its third episode, the critically-skewered TLC series is still miles behind the network’s previous train-wreck TV successes.

read more

via Hollywood Reporter http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/here-comes-honey-boo-boo-ratings-tlc-season-2-365316

What exactly is athletic doping, anyway?

In this Smithsonian Mag piece, some background on the “high-tech, high-stakes competition between Olympic athletes who use banned substances and drug testers out to catch them.” Helpful context for those seeking to understand the science behind today’s news on a doping scandal specific to a certain cycling hero and cancer advocate. (via @alicialane)


via Boing Boing http://boingboing.net/2012/08/24/what-exactly-is-athletic-dopin.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29

Romney says big business is ‘doing fine’

Creating a potential headache for his campaign, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said big businesses in the U.S. were “doing fine” in part because they get advantages from offshore tax havens. His comments echoed similar assertions about the state of big business by President Barack Obama which Romney has criticized. They’re also a reminder that the GOP candidate has kept some of his personal fortune in low tax foreign accounts.

via NYDN Rss Article only http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/mitt-romney-big-business-fine-part-due-offshore-tax-havens-article-1.1143504?localLinksEnabled=false&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fgossip%2Frush_molloy+%28Gossip%2FRush+%26+Molloy%29

Monkey business

Monkey Business

Dang, I really enjoyed this article about a monkey on the loose in Tampa. I think you’ll like it, too, if you like sentences such as, “He received death threats from pro-monkey radicals.” To keep myself from blockquoting the entire story, I had to put away my Copyandpaster. Did you have any idea there were wild monkeys in Florida?

At his desk, Yates unfolded a map of Tampa Bay. But he found he had to flip the map over, then consult other maps, at different scales, to trace the macaque’s entire odyssey. “It’s an amazing feat, when you think about his travels,” he said. Since 2009, Yates estimates that he has gone after the animal on roughly 100 different occasions. The monkey was his white whale. He claimed to have darted it at least a dozen times, steadily upping the tranquilizer dosage, to no avail. The animal is too wily — it retreats into the woods and sleeps off the drug. A few times, the monkey stared Yates right in the eye and pulled the dart out.

[…]

This is not the first time that monkeys have incited a minor populist uprising in Florida. The population of wild rhesus macaques in the middle of the state — the tribe from which, the theory goes, the Mystery Monkey strayed — was established in the late 1930s by a New Yorker named Colonel Tooey. (Colonel was his first name.) Tooey ran boat tours on the picturesque Silver River, a premier tourist destination. A brazen showman, he wanted to ratchet the scenery up another notch. So he bought a half-dozen macaques and plopped them on a small island. Macaques are strong swimmers; Tooey had no idea. According to local lore, the animals were off the island within minutes.

Note: Illustration by Chris Piascik…prints & more are available.

Tags: Florida

via kottke.org http://kottke.org/12/08/monkey-business

Why Too Much Data Disables Your Decision Making

Quick, think back to a major decision. You know, the kind that compelled you to read everything on a topic and lead you to spend hours devouring every last scrap of data.

How’d that work out for you?

We like to think that more information drives smarter decisions; that the more details we absorb, the better off we’ll be. It’s why we subscribe to Google Alerts, cling to our iPhone, and fire up our Tweetdeck.

Knowledge, we’re told, is power. But what if our thirst for data is actually holding us back? What if obsessing over information actually reduces the quality of our decisions?

That’s the question raised by Princeton and Stanford University psychologists in a fascinating study titled On the Pursuit and Misuse of Useless Information.

Their experiment was simple. Participants were divided into two groups. Group 1 read the following:

Imagine that you are a loan officer at a bank reviewing the mortgage application of a recent college graduate with a stable, well-paying job and a solid credit history. The applicant seems qualified, but during the routine credit check you discover that for the last three months the applicant has not paid a $5,000 debt to his charge card account.
Do you approve or reject the mortgage application?

Group 2 saw the same paragraph with one crucial difference. Instead of learning the exact amount of the student’s debt, they were told there were conflicting reports and that the size of the debt was unclear. It was either $5,000 or $25,000. Participants could decide to approve or reject the applicant immediately, or they could delay their decision until more information was available, clarifying how much the student really owed. Not surprisingly, most Group 2 participants chose to wait until they knew the size of the debt.

Here’s where the study gets clever. The experimenters then revealed that the student’s debt was only $5,000. In other words, both groups ended up with the same exact information. Group 2 just had to go out of its way and seek it out.

The result? 71% of Group 1 participants rejected the applicant. But among Group 2 participants who asked for additional information? Only 21% rejected the applicant.

To say the findings are surprising is to state the obvious. After all, everyone had precisely the same information. So why would the rate of rejection be three times higher in Group 1?

The answer underscores a troubling blind spot in the way we make decisions. One that highlights the downside of having a sea of information available at our fingertips, and just might convince you to ditch your iPhone the next time you’re faced with an important choice.

Cliffhangers: Great for Television, Disastrous for Decisions

Remember Seinfeld and Friends? Fifteen years ago, a handful of television shows ended on cliffhangers. Daytime soaps were among the first to regularly end on a climax, and 24 made the practice a fixture of mainstream television. Today, most dramas are loathe to end an episode without one. Even comedies like The Office and Modern Family now rely on cliffhangers to draw viewers back.

There’s a psychological reason cliffhangers are so effective. The human mind hates uncertainty. Uncertainty implies volatility, randomness, and danger. When we notice information is missing, our brain raises a metaphorical red flag and says, ‘”Pay attention. This could be important.'”

Generally, that curiosity is useful. In our evolutionary past, knowing whether that rustling in the bushes belonged to a tiger or a mouse could have meant the difference between life and death. We’re wired to reduce uncertainty because our minds were adapted for another, more hazardous, time.

Seeking out information comes with a downside, however, which accounts for the intriguing difference between the two groups. When data is missing, we overestimate its value. Our mind assumes that since we are expending resource locating information, it must be useful.
Participants in Group 2 couldn’t help but ask for additional data. The mind, after all, hates information gaps. And because their attention was focused on whether the debt was $5,000 or $25,000, their thinking about the loan had shifted. They no longer saw the big picture–that the applicant had a history of defaulting. They were simply too fixated on a relatively minor detail, the size of the debt.

The Seduction of Data

The research underscores a sobering message: We’re fascinated with filling information gaps and that obsession can lead us astray. Especially today, when reducing uncertainty has become all too easy.

What’s the forecast for Friday? Pick up your iPhone. What’s Lindsey Lohan up to? Type in TMZ. Wonder what that girl from 10th grade drama now looks like? Facebook!

And it’s not just trivial information that’s easily accessible. It’s data that drives major business decisions. There’s always one more report, one more analysis, and one more perspective that’s a click or two away.

Neurologically, information is addicting. Learning is associated with the release of dopamine, the same as powerful drugs like cocaine. It’s a why we are so vulnerable to an Internet rife with attention parasites that leave us worse for the wear.

In a world where every click brings the promise of a discovery, we are all at risk of becoming addicts. The challenge lies in differentiating between questions worth exploring and questions best left unasked.

[Image: Flickr user JacobFG]

Sponsored Content: 
No sponsorship


via Fast Company http://www.fastcompany.com/3000676/why-too-much-data-disables-your-decision-making?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+fastcompany%2Fheadlines+%28Fast+Company%29

It’s crunch time to ban brunch time

Chew on this if you’re one of the thousands of New Yorkers who “do brunch” this weekend.

Bunch is a ritual that is corroding the soul of America.

Brunch is decadence, served with a side of bacon.

via NYDN Rss Article only http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/eats/crunch-time-ban-brunch-time-step-plate-turn-wasteful-meal-toast-article-1.1143151?localLinksEnabled=false&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fgossip%2Frush_molloy+%28Gossip%2FRush+%26+Molloy%29

Criteria counts to gain Obama deferred action

Q. I have been here for almost fours years now. I have met all the requirements for the Obama deferred action program, except the one requiring that I had been here five years on June 15. Do I have a chance of getting deferred action?
Name withheld, Brooklyn

A.

via NYDN Rss Article only http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/unqualified-immigrants-apply-obama-deferred-action-program-article-1.1142674?localLinksEnabled=false&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fgossip%2Frush_molloy+%28Gossip%2FRush+%26+Molloy%29

Cory Booker Tells Party He’s Considering a Run Against Chris Christie

Cory Booker met with county chairs  in New Jersey on Thursday to inform them that the years of speculation about a clash between himself and Chris Christie may finally be coming to a head, Politicker NJ reports. Last month Booker said that he’s weighing whether he should challenge the Republican governor in 2013 or go for Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg’s seat in 2014, and sources say he indicated today that he’d make the decision by December. Either way, Christie might want to start rescuing people just to be on the safe side.

Read more posts by Margaret Hartmann

Filed Under:
cory booker
,chris christie

via Daily Intel http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/08/cory-booker-considering-run-against-christie.html

Who paid the GOP bar tab in Galilee?

More details emerge from night of drinking, skinny dipping in Israel.

Add to Twitter
Add to Facebook
Email this Article
Add to digg
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Google
Add to StumbleUpon


via POLITICO – TOP Stories http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/80066.html

Romney Hires Self-Described ‘Mad Men’ to Craft New Campaign Ads

Sterling Cooper gave up on political advertising after its run-in with Richard Nixon, but the Washington Post reports that Romney has assembled his own crack team of advertising gurus, who’ve dubbed themselves the “Mad Men.” Who needs a stupid carousel when you have the dude who came up with “Beef, it’s what’s for dinner”?

Read more posts by Margaret Hartmann

Filed Under:
politcs
,mitt romney
,campaign 2012
,ads
,ad wars
,mad men

via Daily Intel http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/08/romney-hires-self-described-mad-men.html