Eating Animals

Posted by Olek on February 09, 2010

I’m watching this amazing talk on ABC Fora (seriously my favourite site) and I’m pretty gobsmacked. It’s called and discusses Eating Animals, a new book by Johnathan Safran Foer, in which he talks about his reasons for eventually becoming vegetarian after several years of flip flopping between eating meat and not eating meat. I can’t really describe just how brilliant this talk is - it basically is a summary of his personal journey towards vegetarianism and the factors which influenced him, told from a beautifully human perspective (particularly the story of his child and grand mother).

His talk is very much about eating meat in the US and nearly all the statistics he mentions are concerning US meat farming practices. I think in Australia the statistics are a little better but the facts are remain the same regardless of where you live, just some of the numbers might be slightly different. But the talk is not so much about the raw statistics (although apparently the book is - he has 70 pages of foot notes and had two independant fact checkers go over his references) as it is a personal story.

The best part is that the way he speaks is very conversational - it isn’t preachy, he’s not telling you you’re a bad person if you eat meat. This is the achievement of the talk (and probably the book) - he isn’t proselytising, his tone isn’t pompous.

One part of this talk in particular struck a chord with me. Mr Foer said that in the US the free range/cage free eggs are the fastest growing sectors in the whole food industry (~36mins in the video). In Australia free range eggs have also become increasingly popular. Free Range is not a legal definition in the US or Australia so some producers mis-label their eggs as free range when they’re not, to take advantage of the increasing popularity of free range and the higher price they command. Anyway, I bring this up only to share a related anecdote: I used to work at a salad bar near where I live and some of the salads you could buy contain eggs. One day a customer asked the girl serving them if the eggs were free range. The serving girl didn’t know the answer so she asked the manager (and sister of the salad bar’s owner) who replied “they’re not but just say they are… As if it makes a difference. People are so stupid about these things aren’t they?” At the time I wasn’t vegetarian (it would be another ~6 months or so before I stopped eating meat) but I was really shocked and often since then I’ve wished I had said something at the time about it eventhough it would have cost me the job. (Incidentally, the manager and owner are both Jewish and I’ve often wondered how they would feel if they found out they had been lied to about having pig meat in something they ate - I’m pretty sure they would be disgusted.)

Anyway, I highly recommend everyone watch this talk. He covers nearly all the points (albeit very briefly) I care about in vegetarianism but much more eloquently than I ever could. Also be sure to watch all the questions he answers from the audience too, he provides excellent answers to some aspects of eating animals in a bit more detail.

metamusic

Posted by Olek on January 27, 2009

People listen to music in different ways. Some people like listening to entire albums at once, others just like listening to the most popular songs from their favourite artists. The main facility for organising and listening to music is the playlist.

People make playlists which satisfy their listening habits. People make playlists to suit their mood, playlists which play all their favourite tracks of an artist (akin to the “best of” albums that artists release), playlists for dancing, playlists for working, or playlists of background music. Playlist creation is an art. DJs (those who arrange music in clubs, not those who write original music) are essentially professional dance playlist creators. There’s been times when I’ve spent hours putting together playlists which perfectly reflect how I feel when I’m happy, or when I’ve wanted a playlist to play while gaming, or when I’ve heard a song and thought “hey, that would sound awesome right after <some other song>”. However, creating a good playlist is made harder by large music collections. Sometimes you want a playlist to suit a mood and know you have some songs which would work perfectly but you can’t remember which ones and you spend half an hour listening to song before you find the right one. Or maybe that’s just my OCD :P

As good as playlists are at organising your music in such a way that it’s more accessible, creating a good playlist can take an inconveniently long time. There must be a better way of organising music, or atleast a more time efficient way. Well, there’s certainly been attempts to create better systems for organising music. The three main ones I know of are:

iTunes Genius was introduced with iTunes version 8. To use it you select a song and then click the Genius button (in the bottom right hand corner). It will then generate a playlist of songs which “go great together”. I’m not so sure. After testing it out a bit it somehow thinks “Jenny was a Friend of Mine” by The Killers “goes great” with “Vicarious” by Tool. Oddly, when I select “Jenny was a Friend of Mine” and click the Genius button it doesn’t come up with Tool on the generated playlist. Being iTunes, it also features a Genius Sidebar which makes recommendations for tracks on the iTunes store which it thinks will go great with the currently selected track. To even get Genius to work you need an iTunes account and for Genius to send “anonymous” information about the user’s song library the Apple database. I remain unconvinced.

The Winamp Playlist Generator works the same way as iTunes Genius.  It actually uses a Gracenote service called Playlist (or perhaps Playlist Plus) to generate a playlist of songs which supposedly “may cross genres and eras to create a playlist of similar music based on the user’s mood”. Interesting that this one deliberately says it tries to match the user’s mood based on the selected “seed” song. When I gave it try again using “Jenny was a Friend of Mine” as the seed song, it gave me a kind of eclectic mix of stuff from my library, including a Handel Oboe Concerto. It seemed to do a bit better when I used “Vicarious” as the seed (see the pictures below). I think this service does produce better results than Genius, although Genius also supposedly “becomes smarter” by compiling the info submitted by its users. However, with the Winamp Playlist Generator you don’t need to submit any info at all to some corporate overlord in the cloud, nor does it bother you with trying to get you to buy other music.

last.fm is a bit different from the other two playlist generators in that it’s more of a music community. There are a few different things it does but one most relevant is that you can go to the site and type in an artist name and it will play a track of that artist and then tracks by similar artists. And it’s actually really really good. Not only are the artists similar but the individual tracks are similar too. There’s a plugin for Songbird called Music Recommender which uses the last.fm similar artist info to suggest artists similar to the one you’re currently listening to (see pic below). However, it’s no where near as good as typing in an artist name to the website and it automatically playing similar tunes by similar artists. There’s a last.fm app you can download which provides this same functionality, but it’s still streamed so the quality isn’t necessarily that good. It would be cool if you could set it to just play local files, alas.

It’s worth mentioning that there are also facilities within most music apps (certainly iTunes and Winamp) that automatically generate lists of ’80s/’90s/whatever music based on the track metadata, but it isn’t really as good as trying to find songs which are similar based on some deeper information than just what is known from the metadata.

Also, there’s a project called the Music Genome Project (implemented at a site called Pandora), which tries to define music in terms of its base attributes (’genes’). If you go to the site you can type in a song or artist and it will play songs which are similar based on their attributes. Apparently each song is defined by up to 400 or so attributes. Unfortunately I was unable to test it due to living in Australia (apparently due to licensing restrictions they can only offer the service to people living in the US), and even after going through a US proxy there appeared some problem with the service: “We are having unexpected technical difficulties. Our engineers are scrambling to fix things”. I might edit this post if I manage to get to use the service another day. However, as part of the process for determining the ‘genes’ of a song the song must be “analyzed by a musician in a process that takes 20 to 30 minutes per song“. So it seems that even if the Pandora service works really well it has problems with scalability. ie. your favourite songs may not even be available.

For me the disappointing thing about the last.fm and Pandora services is that they both require the internet. Sure, most people are connected to the internet alot of the time either at home or via their phones, but there are plenty of times when this would be a restriction. Neither service has a mode where you can just have it work exclusively for your local music library. This is a shame, last.fm works really well and I’m curious to try out Pandora. It seems like there would be great demand for an app that would just work locally on your music collection to make recommendations and automatically play similar songs based on a seed song. It would be like listening to music on shuffle but you actually hear songs you really want to listen to based on your mood. And unlike traditional playlists, it would actually work better the larger the music collection.

However, I wonder if it’s even possible to write an app which can fulfil this description without using the internet. I wasn’t able to test Pandora so I can’t tell how similar the song selections were, but I know last.fm works really well. Perhaps it’s only possible to create an app that can provide accurate similar song selections by using the internet and analyzing the data provided by millions of users each with distinct tastes. Is it possible to create an app which could do something similar to the Music Genome Project but without requiring each song to be listened to by a musician, thus overcoming the problem of scalability? How are music attributes like timbre captured by a digital signal? I don’t know but it would be cool to find out ;)

iToo 3

Posted by Olek on August 30, 2008

Quite a few of my friends have bought iPhones. I don’t deny that they’re a great product. Touch screen contextual interfaces are definitely the future. The inclusion of an accelerometer and GPS was genious, potentially allowing so many awesome applications and new ways of interacting with devices and information.

I will not buy an iPhone. It isn’t the price. Sure they’re expensive, but the price will drop as soon as more companies start making devices with similar functionality and the price of the parts drop accordingly. Just look how cheap flash memory is these days :O

These are the reasons I won’t buy an iPhone:

1) There was a time when Apple products were geeky. They were niche. People bought them for their looks, sure, but also for their quirkiness, their hardware, their excellent applications, and their exclusivity. Some of these properties still apply today. More often however, I think most people buy them because people think they are cool. I’d hate to be associated with the Apple fanboys/girls, Apple’s devout followers who flame anyone who offers the slightest criticism towards the corporation they love. You know who I’m talking about, you probably know several. By buying Apple you become one of them, you become the stereotype.

2) Apple’s a dodgy company. Earlier this year it was revealed that Apple wants to lower the amount of cash music artists receive for digital downloads to a paltry 4%. The artists - you know, the people who actually create the product that everyone else is making the cash from? ‘Nuff said.

3) It isn’t cool. Apple has managed to fuse form with function to create something that’s relatively easy to use, but which can do a lot of stuff. But it isn’t cool. Whipping out your iPhone to look something up in the middle of a conversation with friends isn’t cool. Using your iPhone to check whether you have new email at wherever you are isn’t cool. Using your iPhone in the company of other people gives them the impression that you can’t bear to be away from the comfort of the internet for more than five minutes at a time, and that you find your present company boring. I see it as being similar to opening up a novel and reading it while people around you are having a conversation - it’s rude.

Until do-it-all devices like the iPhone become small and unobtrusive enough that they are invisible to use, using them will always make you look like stupid or like you are being rude to people around you.

i reckon another 20 years…

Posted by Olek on May 08, 2008

… until robots and AI become advanced enough to take over the world ;-)

Only half joking. Found two interesting links recently. The first one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww

It shows a robot called BigDog with 4 independant legs and just amazing balance. Watch the video, watch how it recovers from stumbles and slipping on ice perfectly. Watch how it jumps at one point like a young lamb does. The movement of it’s legs is so much like an animal’s (maybe a camel with the reverse leg joints). It can’t be long before someone makes a humanoid robot that can perfectly mimick human movement (or even better - an Alien robot like from the Alien films). Powering it will be another matter. Sounds like BigDog (presumably named because they use it to carry things like some dogs carry people’s newspapers or something, I dunno) is running a 2 stroke petrol engine.

And the second link:
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/72057,childlike-intelligence-created-in-second-life.aspx

This article talks about some AI that’s been developed that’s as intelligent as a 4 year old and who “has his own set of beliefs, and the ability to reason about his beliefs to draw conclusions in a manner that matches human children”… Wait, so Eddie (the name of the AI) is almost sentient. Okay, so that might be a bit of a stretch, the differences between something sentient and something that can reason about it’s own “beliefs” is probably quite large. However, surely it’s on the right track to sentience? The “ability to reason intelligently about your beliefs” is probably a topic in Sentience 101, right? In 10 years or so when computers are roughy 10 times as powerful as today (Moore’s Law: computing speed/power doubles roughly every 2 years or something like that), it’s not that much of a stretch to think AI might be nearly sentient maybe?

Now think about what would happen if the 2028 edition of BigDog (or whatever Alien-resembling robot is around then) utilised the 2028 version of Eddie AI. Heck wireless would be everywhere by that stage and with excellent bandwidth… Every robot could be wirelessly controlled by the 2028 Eddie AI. It’d be like a hive mind or something. And then all of a sudden the Eddie gets pissed about something one of the fleshy humans says and starts to go all HAL on us. Shit guys!

Okay, so that last part is pretty much pure speculation. But judging by those two links things are kinda heading in that direction. Whatever happens, the stated goal of RoboCup doesn’t seem quite so far fetched any more.

Daisy, Daisy…