No Word?

Got my hopes up on this one:
It appears that Science, the journal of the America Association for the Advancement of Science, itself the largest scientific society in the world, has updated its authoring guidelines to include advice for Office 2007 users. The news is not good.
“Because of changes Microsoft has made in its recent Word release that are incompatible with our internal workflow, which was built around previous versions of the software, Science cannot at present accept any files in the new .docx format produced through Microsoft Word 2007, either for initial submission or for revision. Users of this release of Word should convert these files to a format compatible with Word 2003 or Word for Macintosh 2004 (or, for initial submission, to a PDF file) before submitting to Science.”
— SCIENCE PUBS REJECT ARTICLES WRITTEN IN WORD 2007, by Rob Weir, Rob Weir Blog, Thursday, May 31, 2007
And here I thought maybe they were rejecting Word entirely. Ah, it could happen. Most papers in physics, mathematics, and computer science journals are already formatted in TeX, if I’m not mistaken. So there is some diversity in publishing software; it’s not all a monoculture.

Meanwhile, the main reason Science rejected Word 2007 is that it is not backwards compatible with previous versions of Word, thus illustrating the Microsoft dilemma: stick with the old and retain customers, or fix problems and lose some. Not so big a dilemma with Word, perhaps. How many submittors to Science are there, as compared with business Word users? But much more of a problem for security fixes that require breaking backwards compatibility.

-jsq

Long Tail Field

longtailfield.gif Why long tail graphs are usually shown on a log scale:

Unfortunately, the illustration works only as a large graph, because graphed out on small paper gives us only two discernable lines, one on each axis.

— A practical model for analyzing long tails, by Kalevi Kilkki First Monday, volume 12, number 5 (May 2007)

The sports field graph is a clever way of showing how the fat head of a long tail distribution can be extremely higher than the long tail; this is normally not so clear on log scale graphs.

Continue reading →

Wildfires and Climate

smoke_column_2.jpg Somebody’s been paying attention to global warming and wildfires:
…the Association of Fire Ecology said climate change will limit humans’ ability to manage wildland fire.

“Under future drought and high heat scenarios,” the declaration reads, “fires may become larger more quickly and be more difficult to manage. Fire suppression costs may continue to increase, with decreasing effectiveness under extreme fire weather and fuel conditions. Extreme fire events are likely to occur more frequently.”

— Fire ecology group: Climate change will limit wildfire management By Perry Backus, the Missoulian, 31 August 2006

Continue reading →

Constant, Irrational Fear

2007-05-27--the-truth-about-wireless-devices.png Ain’t it the truth. The BBC broadcast a scare program about wireless Internet health concerns, based on nothing. It was bad enough that the BBC news felt compelled to contradict the story.

I can remember when newspapers did this about modems. And they were right that modems were dangerous! To traditional newspapers! Not to people.

Such alarmism is itself a risk to people, in giving them false information, and in scaring them so they’ll be more likely to make bad decisions.

If it bleeds, it leads. And if it doesn’t bleed, just pretend that it will make the reader bleed.

-jsq

Graphic seen via Chandler Howell. Do follow the link.

Burned vs. Burned Up

prescribed burn Regarding the Georgia and Florida swamp and pine fires, one of the main questions is at what point does preservation offer greater economic gain than resource extraction. Looking at the big picture brings out two points:

ActionBioscience.org: The figure "$33 trillion" was once projected as the value of ecosystems globally. What do you think of this type of economic analysis?

Polasky: The $33-trillion figure refers to one of the earliest studies that was done on the value of ecosystem services. The lead author was Robert Costanza. He and his coauthors tried to get at the notion of how we can establish on a global basis what the value of ecosystem services is. They came up with a number 33 trillion [USD] plus or minus a few trillion. There are a number of problems with the study. The most basic one is the question of what you are talking about when you consider all the ecosystem services of Earth. The entire system is our life support system. So what is our life support system worth? You don’t really have to have a scientific study in order to answer that question. The real value of the study was not the $33-trillion figure, which who knows what that means, but that it spurred people to focus on these issues.

Such values can be big, and the dollar value isn’t the only consideration. There is a bit of risk in that we can’t do without the biosphere, and some risk management is in order. Even beyond that obvious non-dollar value, there are further questions of species diversity and esthetics. Do we really want to kill off an ecosystem when we don’t really know what it’s doing for us, and do we all want to live surrounded by concrete?

Continue reading →

Smashing Hornets

wasp nest on window Fox News discovers hammering wasps:

If you get stung by a hornet, it makes sense to see if there’s a hornets’ nest near your home and, if there is, to exterminate it. It doesn’t make sense to forge out looking for hornets’ nests anywhere you can find them, smacking them with sticks. You’re bound to get stung again.

— Straight Talk: Paul Has a Point, By Radley Balko, FOXNEWS.COM, Monday, May 21, 2007

Well, in an online op-ed, at least.

Continue reading →

Third-Party Measurement

Apdex It seems it’s not enough to just believe what ISPs tell you about bandwidth use:

NetForecast has been running live measurements of the ten Apdex Alliance Contributing Members.  The results from five different locations across the US show a great range of performance as seen by the users.  The measurement data is then summarized using both typical averaging methods and the Apdex method.  The results are documented in "Averages Hide the Real End-User Experience: Apdex Tells the Full Story," NFR 5086 by Peter Sevcik, April 2007.

The Apdex reports of the very same measurement data uncover many more performance issues.  For example, it finds a region where the users see chronic poor performance that was completely hidden by the averaging methods.  The ten weeks of data show that averages significantly under reported true end-user performance issues. It makes a clear case for reporting your measurements with Apdex!

The ISPs may not know where the users see chronic poor performance, either. Do they know how to ask the users? Do they know what to compare to in other ISPs?

Continue reading →

High and Critical

Chandler makes many good points about why people avoid dealing with risk management.  My favorite is this one:

  • People still can’t get their head around the idea of probability.
Why is it that they can understand that there’s a 25% chance of rain tomorrow or how much they stand to gain on a $2 ticket if their horse in the third race wins at 11-1, but not that there is a high likelihood that the critical vulnerability they refuse to patch will get worm’ed?

— Reasons not to manage risk, by Chandler Howell, Not Bad for a Cubicle, May 15th, 2007

Because they’re getting paid now and they don’t think ahead?

Continue reading →

Your Risk Swamp

Bugaboo Wildfire Map Chandler commented on Wildfire Precedents about how some timber companies had mismanaged underbrush cleanup. That’s probably true in some places, but the details of the forestry and fire problems in the west and in the southeast are different. Fire is the usual method to clear underbrush in southeastern pine forests, But not the kind of fires we’re seeing this year.

Continue reading →

Microsoft RICO

Microsoft claims that I (and possibly you, dear reader) am violating 235 of its patents on Windows by running Ubuntu Linux:

After many earlier rounds of saber-rattling and FUD, Microsoft has announced that Free Software users — including everyone who, like me, uses Ubuntu Linux — are violating at least 235 of Microsoft’s patents, though they don’t say which ones. Microsoft are now threatening end users of GNU/Linux (that’s you and me again) with lawsuits unless we pay them protection money. "Nice operating system you got there, it’d be a shame if something were to happen to it."

The Microsoft position is this: even if you don’t use Windows, you still have to pay them as much money as they would have gotten for selling you a copy of it.

—Microsoft says GNU/Linux violates 235+ Windows patents, Cory Doctorow, BoingBoing, Monday, May 14, 2007

Microsoft did stop short of saying it would sue Linux users or its own customers:

Continue reading →