Predicting elections with Google

So, Google says that it can predict winning candidates based on search frequency on their search engine, with small margin of error. It predicts this by looking at what is most frequently searched, like Jerry Brown wikipedia or Meg Whitman bio (in this gubernatorial race, Whitman has almost 50% more search volume, even though Brown leads in the polls).
I think that this is really interesting, because of what it could possibly entail. Could it make polls obsolete? And in this particular race, where the two results are in opposition of each other, which will be right?
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/searching-your-way-to-ballot-box.html

Keep the Labs

I will wholeheartedly and untiringly support and lobby for the institution we know as labs. I really enjoy the labs, not because they're fun, but because they're useful. I think that here, and nowhere else, we learn how to get familiar with the concepts that are introduced. I think that this works better than worksheets, because it also forces us to troubleshoot. It teaches us the different types of errors we may encounter in a code, and we learn how to correct them. You don't trouble-shoot worksheets, you only get stuff marked wrong.

NASA fail

And NASA adds one more embarrassment to its ever-growing annals. In Australia, an attempt to release a balloon carrying a telescope belonging to UC Berkeley ended with the telescope dragged over a distance of some 150 yds, eventually hitting an airport fence and a car. The gamma-ray telescope was, presumably, destroyed.
Whatever happened to NASA being reputable? Really, NASA's reputation is falling apart, with its ever-growing series of gaffes. The ISS is becoming a joke, with extremely poor maintenance; it is said that a leaky roof was dealt with by a metal overhang over a computer that redirects the water to a bucket. After working so hard, NASA is finally losing the Space Race; with the retirement of its fleet of space shuttles, the only way to get to the ISS is via Russia's Soyuz.
NASA needs to get its game going. I want to see the NASA of the Cold War, the innovative administration that got new things done, and accomplished things never done before, that some thought were impossible.
From Slashdot, but http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=31922

Reflection on Week 6

Finally, the if statements! If statements are so much fun; they're also the first time we actually get to do stuff that resembles actual programming! Sure, we got java to do stuff for us before. But programs should be able to work in multiple scenarios, which if statements enables them to do. That's when programming gets fun, and I'm really glad that we managed to get there.
Of course, I was absent the day we did if statements...pity. Lucky they're straightforward.

BPA

I find it amusing how people put almost everything after profit. It seems anything that is profitable causes harm. So, naturally, people are always harmed, because no one wants to work against convenience and actually do something. That is what I hate about corporate America; they never act preemptively. If there is no overwhelming amount of evidence, they will always find a way to get around not using it. Look at Avandia, which causes cardiovascular problems. Look at how long it took the FDA to go against it. And look at the company, still trying to prove that Avandia doesn't do anything harmful.
The same with BPA, or Bisphenol A, a compound used often in plastics. It's said to interfere with the endocrine system by mimicking the effects of estrogen, the female hormone. And so, Canada declared it toxic. Good for them. But, the American Chemist's Association immediately caused an uproar over it. Why?! They should congratulate Canada for taking action on it. Instead, they ramble on about how it will hurt industry, and how there has been no conclusive proof of BPA's harm.
The study model for harmful substances makes no sense. It is to make sure of effects before recall. And yet, by the time you finalize studies, some of which take years, how many have been affected? Shouldn't a more effective model be to recall as soon as there is a possibility of harm, and reinstate if it's shown that there is no harm. People really need to become divorced from profit. It's really annoying.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/world/americas/14bpa.html?_r=1 The original is from slashdot, but slashdot is a summary, so I post the real article.

Reflection on Week 5

I'm tired (from 8 hours of practice in two days). And sick. Cut some slack for subpar post with lazy grammar, please.
I'm glad to say that I'm starting to get the hang of the general structure, and some of it is starting to be habit. There are still a few things that bug me, like why semicolons don't come after methods or classes, but I'll get used to that. But I put semicolons on everything now, which is good. I don't even have to think about it.
I like the labs. They're rather mundane, but what they do is give practice, let you use a new concept, and get familiar with it. I think they're the most important part of class at this moment.
<succumbs to headache>

Water as an Export

Water in the US comes rather for granted. Turn on a tap, and there you have it. Enough water for whatever your needs are. However, in many water-starved areas, it's not so easy. In the Middle East and Africa, there are thousands of communities without access to the most basic need of life. In an almost perverse opposite, the town of Sitka in Alaska sits on a 6 billion gallon lake, inventively named Blue Lake. For years, it's just been sitting there, feeding about 1000 people. But now, the water will finally be exported; to India.
On the surface, this seems a good thing, but underneath is the transformation of water as a public commodity to a private one. As a public commodity, water goes out to everyone. As a private one, it goes only to those who can pay for it.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/08/the-race-to-buy-up-the-world-s-water.html It's from slashdot, but this is the story it's based on, and it's a lot more detailed.

Reflection on Week 4

I'm starting to get to the point where there are terms that I don't quite get, and they're coming back to bite me. For instance, I never quite understood what EXACTLY a constructor is. I know it's a special type of method. I know it has to do with instantiation, which is creating...something. But it's that something that destroys my knowledge of the concept. And then there's stuff like that thing where you have %f with columns and row numbers and decimal places and all that; we never did a single lab with it, and consequently I have no clue how to work with it. I think the labs are the most important aspect of the class; that's where we take the theories and apply them. And I think that application is the most important part of understanding.

Galactic Clusters Merging

Galactic clusters are clusters of...well, galaxies. Naturally, they are huge. The result from two of them colliding is massive. So naturally, someone decides to model it.
Which is an feat as large as the clusters themselves. The reason that this is important to model, though, is to observe dark matter, which has to be observed indirectly; to find how it affects gravitational forces, you have to see it, not measure it. The simulation accounts for the mixing of both normal matter and dark matter, and basically models the mixing of two gigantic balls of gas compounds, with each different part of the compound having its own properties.
I found it interesting simply because I like astronomy.  I find deep space objects interesting (although not nearly enough to go into astronomy as a profession. Hobby, maybe).
And that's all, cause I have Great Ideas homework to finish.
http://news.discovery.com/space/us-lab-simulates-the-awesome-power-of-galactic-mergers.html

Reflection on Week 3

Well, I actually studied for this week's test, which reflects my grade, luckily. I liked this test. I liked it in that it was not horribly written. I liked it in that there were no new or untaught concepts on this test. I liked it in that it was quick and straightforward. The only thing that was not all that great about the test was that it pulled heavily from previous quizzes and that many of the questions were exactly the same. That, I felt, defeats some of the purpose of a test, which is to test how well you understand a material, and not how well you can memorize previous Q and A's. However, I got a 97, so I won't complain too much.
I think that the powerpoints are not as effective as they should be. Perhaps I was simply more interested in Balaclava than the presentation, or perhaps I simply didn't comprehend that quickly, but whatever the reason, most of that went right over my head. I had to go through the powerpoint and reread much of it before understanding. I still, however, would like for the teacher to go over the powerpoints in class; it's a good introductory.
Regardless, I would be glad indeed if there were no quiz on Monday.