archive

Archive for the ‘Divers’ Category

Short Interview

Tuesday, September 7th, 2010

Just to bookmark it somewhere… Interview at WebValley 2010…

Boxplot

Thursday, August 26th, 2010

Great script (in CSS and Javascript) which makes it really easy to display boxplots on a website. Great!

Nightlights of the Earth

Sunday, August 15th, 2010

TED: Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the learning revolution!

Monday, June 14th, 2010

TED: Brian Skerry reveals ocean’s glory — and horror

Monday, June 14th, 2010

TED: Beau Lotto: Optical illusions show how we see

Monday, March 15th, 2010

TED: Dan Barber: How I fell in love with a fish

Monday, March 15th, 2010

TED: Bill Davenhall: Your health depends on where you live

Monday, March 1st, 2010


Very nice slides!

GDP – What It Is, and What Not

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

“Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product … if we should judge America by that – counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for those who break them. It counts the destruction of our redwoods and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and the cost of a nuclear warhead, and armored cars for police who fight riots in our streets. It counts Whitman’s rifle and Speck’s knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.

Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it tells us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.”

Robert F. Kennedy

Unit Juggler – Convert everything with ease

Friday, January 15th, 2010

Change units how you want it. Really cool. Often enough problems with Metric Tons, Gigagrams, Kilograms….

TED: Anupam Mishra, The ancient ingenuity of water harvesting

Monday, January 11th, 2010

TED: Dan Buettner, How to live to be 100+

Monday, January 11th, 2010

TED: Nick Veasey, Exposing the Invisible

Monday, January 11th, 2010

Copenhagen, comments

Monday, December 28th, 2009

From the Footprint Network. Much about the Climate Talks was quiet puzzling as well:

  • Most delegations seem to be unaware of the link between climate change and resource constraints. Why would Europe propose to reduce emissions by X, and to reduce even more if everybody participates? If they fully realized resource constraints, and recognized that without a strong Copenhagen regime the world will get volatile more quickly, their proposition would look differently: They would suggest to reduce emissions by X, and if NOBODY participates,would propose to reduce European resource use even more to get Europe ready for a wild and rapidly resource-constrained future.
  • Informed negotiators would arrive to Copenhagen with the mind-frame of “we have a big incentive to make this deal work, because without the deal, we will have to work harder,” rather than “I will not reduce if you don’t”.
  • Perhaps these Climate Talks should not be called negotiations (which connote: “How much am I willing to give?”). A better name would reflect designing a new framework for cooperation (“How do we need to work with each other in order not to sink the planet?”). It was particularly stunning to see how addicted we still are to outdated terms like “developing and developed countries”. These terms embody the linear development that is not only becoming physically impossible, but is also the one that got us into the climate problem in the first place. What we need is green prosperity, or green development, that works with, rather than against the budget of nature.
  • The obvious was missing: If we are to meet the G-20 intention of keeping climate change within 2 °C, we’d need to follow the IPCC reduction path of at least minus 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. This essentially means moving out of fossil fuel. But hardly anybody admits this mathematical truth. If we accept the G-20 intention and its mathematical consequences, then consider this: Why is it that we haggle so much about access rights to emissions? It would essentially mean negotiating access to zero emissions (after 2050). Why are we putting so much effort into trying to negotiate access rights to zero carbon?
  • Perhaps most striking is that the great majority of leaders ignore their nation’s self-interest. Possibly the most notable exceptions were Arnold Schwarzenegger and many of our partner countries like UAE or Ecuador. Others ignore that preparing aggressively for a resource-constrained future is in their most immediate national self-interest. After all, it takes decades to prepare countries, cities and economies for a resource-constrained future. For most countries it is in their self-interest to go beyond the most hopeful Copenhagen targets. Waiting for a global consensus would hurt their own ability to operate in the future.
  • But there were also quite a few achievements:

  • Many local initiatives – cities, pro-active businesses, regions – are already moving ahead even without global agreements. The United Arab Emirates’ Masdar City is a prominent example
  • REDD+ (United Nations’ collaborative programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) represents a solid recognition, that land-use and biocapacity are keys to the global carbon cycle. Many solutions to climate change will come from carefully managing our use of ecosystem services.
  • Delegations showed their level of commitment, negotiating through the night and working tirelessly towards solutions – all encouraging signs that we are at a historical crossroads. Sustainability is certainly no longer a sideshow.

TED: Misha Glenny investigates global crime networks

Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

TED: Jonathan Zittrain: The Web as random acts of kindness

Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

TED: David Logan on tribal leadership

Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

TED: Matthew White gives the euphonium a new voice

Friday, December 4th, 2009

TED: Lewis Pugh swims the North Pole

Friday, December 4th, 2009

Theory of Multiple Intelligences

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

The theory of multiple intelligences was proposed by Howard Gardner in 1983 to more accurately define the concept of intelligence and to address the question whether methods which claim to measure intelligence (or aspects thereof) are truly scientific. Gardner’s theory argues that intelligence, particularly as it is traditionally defined, does not sufficiently encompass the wide variety of abilities humans display. In his conception, a child who masters multiplication easily is not necessarily more intelligent overall than a child who struggles to do so. The second child may be stronger in another kind of intelligence and therefore 1) may best learn the given material through a different approach, 2) may excel in a field outside of mathematics, or 3) may even be looking at the multiplication process at a fundamentally deeper level, which can result in a seeming slowness that hides a mathematical intelligence that is potentially higher than that of a child who easily memorizes the multiplication table.