Archive for June, 2009

Less Popular than Jesus

Saturday, June 27th, 2009

John Lennon once said, referring to the Beatles, “We’re more popular than Jesus.” At dinner last night someone said that Michael Jackson was more popular than the Beatles. That surprised me. Was Michael Jackson more popular than Jesus? Google hits, as of this morning:

  • Beatles: 54,400,000
  • Jesus Christ: 47,600,000
  • Michael Jackson: 41,600,000

For comparison:

  • Barack Obama: 95,800,000
  • Harry Potter: 93,200,000
  • Brad Pitt: 28,200,000

Does that make J. K. Rowling (6,600,000 Google hits) the most powerful person in the world? Unlike President Obama, she can say whatever she wants. And she speaks to the most impressionable people in the world.

The Story of Hyundai: A Lesson in Public Speaking

Friday, June 26th, 2009

Hyundai, rhymes with Sunday.

I loved this talk at MIT by John Krafcik, head of Hyundai’s American branch. It lasted an hour; I wished it was longer. It reminded me of Carl Willat‘s Trader Joe’s commercial: Full of emotion, in this case Krafcik’s pride in his company and what they’ve done. Toyota is the world’s number #1 car company; when a Toyota executive interviewed for a job at Hyundai, he told them that at Toyota, they are most afraid of Hyundai. So afraid that they bought five straight years of a certain Hyundai model, took them all apart, and studied how each system changed from year to year. (I used to compare New Yorker articles with their book versions, word by word, to see what the editors changed. John Updike compared two versions of Vladimir Nabokov’s memoir, Conclusive Evidence and Speak, Memory, word by word. More recently I noticed that Zadie Smith’s On Beauty had significant differences between the audio and printed versions.)

Krafcik repeated an old Jay Leno joke: “How do you double the value of a Hyundai? Half-fill the gas tank.” So he had a great story to tell, the return from ignominy, but curiously he barely told it. Probably this was because he was working at Ford at the time. I have no great interest in cars, I’m not particularly interested in why one company does better than another, yet I was entranced. I came away thinking that most of what I’d heard about public speaking was wrong — most of the stuff in Made to Stick, for example. Sure, the advice to tell a story — and most speakers don’t even understand that — is right. Krafcik did tell a story. But that’s the easy part. I think everyone understands what a story is. The harder part is convey emotion.  Carl Willat has said to me that in movies, that’s all that matters. Absolutely, and I think what’s he saying applies to talks as well. Of course an academic talk must have content. But the practical lesson for me is that when planning a talk I should pick something I care a lot about and in the talk do my best to convey how I feel. That’s all. Don’t worry about telling a joke, don’t worry about slick visuals, don’t try to impress them.
I plan to show Krafcik’s talk to graduate students (in psychology) because it makes a point I doubt they’ve heard: It’s fine if it’s other people’s work that you feel strongly about. Krafcik isn’t the head of Hyundai. He had nothing to do with their long comeback. But he’s proud of his company — and he conveyed that in spades, and that was enough. Suppose you do research on X. You’re giving a talk about it — perhaps a job talk. Maybe your research is mediocre. But you think research on X is incredibly important. Fine — just make that clear. Everyone in the audience will like you for being able to appreciate the work of others, that’s so rare. When you point them to other work that is great, you’re helping them. Suppose you’re teaching a class. Find the parts of the subject that you feel strongly about. Do your best to convey how strongly you feel. Better positive than negative but negative works. (Ask Nassim Taleb.) Avoid the parts you don’t feel strongly about.

In a sense all speaking (and all writing) is public speaking (unless we’re talking to ourselves, which is rare). The audience might be one person or a hundred people, it doesn’t matter, the principle is the same: We use the emotion in what we hear to judge how much attention we should pay to it. Zero emotion = zero attention. I once visited Alaska. While I was there I took a day trip to a glacier. Near the glacier was a building with a little slide show about the glacier, with a taped narration. It was all very dry — the glacier grows in winter, shrinks in summer, there are these animals nearby — but you could tell the speaker cared a lot about the glacier. I was terribly struck by that. How rare it is to hear someone talk about something they really care about, I thought. I’ve told that story dozens of times. But I didn’t manage to translate it into advice about how to give a talk.

A Perfect Storm of Airport Improvements

Thursday, June 25th, 2009

I’m flying to Los Angeles today. Three new things — all of them new to me this flight — are making this trip distinctly more pleasant than earlier trips:

1. Southwest has special check-in if you’ve checked in online but have a bag to check.  The line went very fast.

2. Crocs shoes. So easy to slip off and on at security.

3. Free Wi-Fi while waiting for flight.

I suppose after a while I’ll get used to this but right now it reminds me of how I felt the first few times I read the NY Times online.

Acne Self-Experimentation: Why It’s Promising

Wednesday, June 24th, 2009

This article reports that there was no acne whatsoever among the Kitava Islanders in Papua New Guinea and the Ache hunter-gatherers in Paraguay. Here is the abstract:

BACKGROUND: In westernized societies, acne vulgaris is a nearly universal skin disease afflicting 79% to 95% of the adolescent population. In men and women older than 25 years, 40% to 54% have some degree of facial acne, and clinical facial acne persists into middle age in 12% of women and 3% of men. Epidemiological evidence suggests that acne incidence rates are considerably lower in nonwesternized societies. Herein we report the prevalence of acne in 2 nonwesternized populations: the Kitavan Islanders of Papua New Guinea and the Aché hunter-gatherers of Paraguay. Additionally, we analyze how elements in nonwesternized environments may influence the development of acne. OBSERVATIONS: Of 1200 Kitavan subjects examined (including 300 aged 15-25 years), no case of acne (grade 1 with multiple comedones or grades 2-4) was observed. Of 115 Aché subjects examined (including 15 aged 15-25 years) over 843 days, no case of active acne (grades 1-4) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The astonishing difference in acne incidence rates between nonwesternized and fully modernized societies cannot be solely attributed to genetic differences among populations but likely results from differing environmental factors. Identification of these factors may be useful in the treatment of acne in Western populations.

This implies that acne isn’t inevitable. It’s almost surely caused by something environmental — perhaps diet, perhaps something else (such as washing your face with soap). That’s why self-experimentation about acne is promising: By changing your environment in various ways, you may be able to figure out what’s causing your acne.

Gmail as Ponzi Scheme

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

Now that everyone knows what a Ponzi scheme is, isn’t gmail quite close to one? More and more users, more and more storage needed to store their email. The price of storage is unlikely to fall forever. Eventually cost per user will overtake profit per user — and then the whole thing begins to collapse. Not in my lifetime, please.