Social Mode

Genetic drift is one of the infrequently mentioned mechanisms of evolution along with our all-time favorite, natural selection, and the remaining two: mutation and migration.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIIDGeneticdrift.shtml  

Unlike natural selection, which operates primarily on the genotype over relatively long time periods, selection by consequences operates on the organism’s phenotype or behavior which is a combination of genetic and environmental factors of the organism that can change over relatively short time periods. 

 Genetic drift results in having reduced elements of variability in the population from which natural selection can work.  Some of the variants of the species that were zapped including mutations are no longer available for selection.

 Thus, just by chance, a part of the population was wiped out and the surviving organisms would be left to propagate and leave behind more genetic descendents than those that were killed. (dah!) The organisms in subsequent generations would thus be the “lucky” because they didn’t get zapped. 

Thus, the next generation organisms are not necessarily a better fit or a product of the survival of the fittest [in the biological sense].  The organisms represent the survival of the luckiest and in so doing, represent genetic drift in that they are there because they avoided the vagaries of chance. 

 Genetic drift affects the genetic makeup of the population but, unlike natural selection, these effects are via a random probability set of processes or events. Some gene attributes end due to things outside forces and independent of their behavior.  They are in the wrong spot at the wrong time.

 Such is the case with Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar, the former Burma.

As if being stepped on in the form of a cyclone, the reclusive and isolated communities of Myanmar have been squished.  With 28,000 known dead and no water, food, or shelter, disease could take up to 1,500,000 people (3% of the population) in the coming months.  They have died for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 Besides the huge losses, the callous and unconscionable refusal to deliver aid to its citizens will make the next decade hostile for life in Myanmar.  As a culture ethnically made up Tibetans and Chinese, they are one of the most superstitious cultures on earth.  This doesn’t bode well for changing their situation or for life.  Furthermore, small cultural groups disproportionally make up the ultra militaristic government and social and economic wealth of the country.

In a sense, are we seeing the effects of a genetic drift on an entire population take place?  The isolation by both tribes within Myanmar and the entire population as a whole has kept the genetic pool more free of global interaction from outsiders. The harsh military dictatorship and close control of visas has accentuated the effect of keeping the Myanmar people without much genetic variation over the last 40 years.   

·         Do you see a parallel here to genetic drift that results from wiping out a portion of a bird colony or a seals from their breeding grounds?  

·         What can we expect in this case?  Are some changes going to occur due to the loss of select tribes [in whole or in part] along the coast that never really intermarried or mingled with those in the deep forests?  

·         Is the superstition culturally at play today going to be accentuated or be challenged in an effort to survive?   

·         Is it likely that the soothsayers or the fortunetellers will be held accountable for not telling the faithful what was about to happen?

·         How is the surviving genetic pool – still isolated by military decree – going to change if they do change?

My local Chevron now features a video display on top of the pump that tells you they only profit between $.03-$.12/gallon on the gas you’re buying.

Yup, they are making a plea for you not to complain about their prices and bring your car back because the gas station only makes $.03/gallon.  Oh, and please pay cash because the credit card fees cut into their profit. Hahahahaha.

a) marketing department should have made the video to say it COSTS the hard working gas station folks $3.97/gallon to serve you.

b) Gas Stations make a lot of money, but not on gas.  Really, i didn’t know.

They obviously understand behavior and buying affinities, so they should use that knowledge to better effect.  Undercut pricing of supermarkets on milk, diapers and eggs and market the fact, “We Understand the Economic Crunch.”  People will still buy the 95% margin coffee and energy drinks if they can get the gas, milk, eggs, and diapers cheaper.

It’s unlikely consumers will feel much pity for gas company that the current gas price pump ads attempt to generate.  They will appreciate cheaper prices on necessities and maybe even attribute empathy to the gas stations and oil companies.

Oh, and if cash makes them more money, they should put ATMs at the pump so people have cash on hand more often.

~R

Have you tried many of these “green” products out there?  The cleaners, the lightbulbs, the hybrid cars, and all the other end a round products intended to reduce your output of non-green/bad for the environment stuff…  

I have.

Most of these products suck.

Dishes take 3 times to clean in the dishwasher.  Clothes still smell after 2 washes.  Hybrids can’t haul your stores groceries from the distribution centers to your shelves.  The lights barely can light a room and will poison you if you break them.

Are these just “beta products” that we’ll figure out and improve… or is that what green is?  A label on a watered down product that gets you to consume more energy, but in non obvious ways.  

God, the Green Movements marketing ROCKS!

Concerned about the well being of humankind?  Try improving health care and wellness.  We’re bound to save more lives by improving health care than curbing the heating of the earth 100 years from now (yes, go to Wikipedia or your information source of choice to find out how much this “greening” effort is actually going to help stall warming, save the planet, save mankind…).  How can so many people get fired up about Saving the Planet but can’t get fired up about Health Care Reform?

Yeah, it’s the marketing.  Yeah, it’s our history of behavior.  Yes, it’s what we have come to value.  Or rather, what it costs us to “feel like we’re making a difference.”  That’s one of the key things about the Green Movement that other social movements haven’t figured out - how to make people feel like they are making a difference even when all they do is buy a different brand.  Health care, education and peace movements all require too much effort from an individual on a topic/issue/situation that may not directly, daily impact them.  The requirements pushed out by the leading organizations behind the non-Green issues are too high for what people get out of them. Today.

Consider this quip for fun…

Global Warming gets blockbuster movies like The Day After Tomorrow to scare everyone into greening up.

Health Care gets SiCKO.

I’ve seen SiCKO once, and my family is in it.

I’ve seen Day After Tomorrow 4 times, once without audio on a plane.

Global Warming gets 100 websites, social networks, Global Rock Concerts, CurrenTV.

Health care gets… some brochure-ware websites and some old congressmen.

I can go to the store and buy a Green Friendly lightbulb to Save The Planet.  I can fight with Aetna for two years to reduce my premium on preventative care.

If health care reformers want to make an impact now, they need to figure out the marketing.  Make it immediate, make it now, make it reinforcing, and make it easy.  And don’t forget the sex appeal, afterall Global Warmings coverboy is Al Gore.

~R

Man, like I always say… whatever you think is new, cool and uniquely your idea, assume someone else is working on it.

Consider this patent some slashdotter’s uncovered from Microsoft.  This is very similar to my idea I outlined here on this blog combined with one of my other ideas.

Oh well.  I guess I better hurry up and build these things.  At the very least, there’s validation that these ideas aren’t completely insane and maybe worth doing sooner rather than later.

Cool.

Happy Mother’s Day.

A couple of posts ago I made a mistake in my data assumptions on the number of movies in available for recommendation.  IMBD gives a better idea… i was off by about 20x.  hahaha.  yikes.

The other day i was making a point to someone about how the blog medium promotes research laziness.  Here I prove my own point.  Painful.  Luckily this same medium allows you to print retractions, updates, and improvements uber fast.

~R

Nargis was fate!

May 9, 2008

With a gaping look of angst similar to what played out during the Katrina catastrophe in this country, the heads of state around the world are trying to “help” Myanmar’s military ruler, Than Shwe, respond to Cyclone Nargis.

Problems abound. 

• Over 100,000 people are dead; millions homeless and starving
• Than Shwe is a military dictator that didn’t get complete control of the idyllic former Burma by trusting carpet baggers.
• They have one of the more superstitious cultures on Earth
• Cities are cut off from food, water, communication and shelter
• As a country they compare well with Cuba as repressive and reclusive

President Bush said that “We’re prepared to move US Navy assets to help find those people who need help” but I am sure he meant the Seabees and not the military part of the Navy.  But, as usual, the 3^rd item above may be the most critical for NOT being able to help than the others but, of course, there are always multiple causes for behavior, political or individual.

Everyone in Myanmar relies on soothsayers, fortunetellers and spiritualism to make their decisions at every level of the society.  It is all the rage.  So, not just the generals and the government bureaucrats don’t want the help, the people themselves have a conflict in that they need to eat today but they believe in fate as a way of life; Nargis was their fate!  That means they have to consult their spiritual leaders mentioned above.

There is a separate layer of logic or influence that controls the behavior of the leaders and the citizens that has a bigger influence than the life and death struggle they are waging right now.  It is almost like an organized ‘thing’ they do.  What this means in a bigger sense, those that want to help better be sensitive to the belief systems of the leaders or they won’t get anything done.  Sound familiar? 

The consequences of all this are bountiful for those trying to figure it out.  Bottom line for the people in Myanmar:

• What I value may conflict with what you value
• What I believe is of value to me more than what you believe
• I value going to the advisor, soothsayer, fortuneteller to get direction
• I am subject to my fate

We’re lucky – knock on wood – that we live in a democracy where we exercise free choice to go to church and exercise our free will by voting that prevents dictators from overstepping the bounds of our government – except in Michigan and Florida – and for having institutions that take care of us without strings attached and provide for us during times of need.  We should all go and pray that Myanmar’s kind autocratic bullying and superstition never takes root on American soil. 

Now if I just had enough money for gas I’d go light a candle in the darkness at my church.  I’ll have to walk even though it is raining.  Better not open my umbrella in the house.  It might catch that ladder over the doorway and scare Chester my black cat across my path.

After a Bloomberg.com article By En-Lai Yeoh

http://www.netflixprize.com/leaderboard

Check out the leaderboard.  The recent progress by the top four teams has been impressive recently.

BellKor should win this within 2 months.  They also showcase a key point in their blog.  To achieve practical results you don’t need a crazy model with a lot of predictors.

I’ve yet to figure out why they spend $1,000,000 on this algorithm and/or the press/buzz in generated.  Their own algos and business rules do almost as well as this already.  But, hey, if you have $1,000,000 laying around to give to some smart researchers, great!

~R

Is this the headline you’ve been waiting for?

Can I predict bloggers/blog readers voting preferences based on which headline they respond to?

NOTE:  This headline and series of upcoming posts is a SOCIAL EXPERIMENT.  I am attempting to do an informal poll on key future headlines.  I will be testing a series of headlines of the coming days to see which ones get the most response in the various blogging inter connections.  Partly I want to know how far out in front of a potential news story you have to be to get the traffic and I want to measure how willing people are to read the news they want to hear versus the news that is…

what’s your take?

By now, it should be clear to most campaign organizers, media pundits and voters that politics and the Internet live in loving disharmony.  The Internet is both the most lethal medium to a campaign (gossip, candid cameras, endless gaffe replays) and the the most efficient marketing message machine. 

In this post I take a quick look at the email campaigns of the major candidates.  Actually, I’m only going to go so far as to compare From names, Subject lines, send times and quantity.  Anyone who’s ever done significant email campaigns knows those are the KEY elements to get right… if you blow those the message never gets to the inbox or the user never opens it.

For this informal study I only look at email from 2/1/2008 through 5/6/2008.  I’ve posted email inbox snapshops below for the three main candidates.

Who’s using email most effectively?

What are the strategies?

Does it work at all?

Are these sales pitches for votes or catalysts to involvement?

Emails Sent:

• McCain: 39 or about 3.1 per week
• Obama: 70 or about 5.8 per week
• Clinton: 66 or about 5.5 per week

Number of Unique Senders:

Who do you think is using email the best and why?  What’s your experience?

Obama Campaign:

Clinton:

McCain:

NOTE: Michael Jung compiled these screenshots and went through the painful process of subscribing to everyone’s emails, even the candidates we don’t remember.  What he wanted me to remind everyone, “And don’t forget to tell everyone to go visit http://www.nowcali.com!”

I need a real world situation involving a rich, but somewhat contained behavior space to attempt a cellular automata model.

In watching the rather lame De La Hoya and Forbes fight last night (gosh, I haven’t seen a blockbuster match in 3-4 years and I watch a lot of boxing!) it occurred to me that boxing might be a very good subject to study.

Why?

• Fixed physical space (boxing ring, arena)
• Rich, but contained environment (ring, corners, arena, crowd, cities)
• A huge amount of historical data (we can watch and record 100s of recent fights and study individual boxers)
• Rewards and Punishments are severe and are both immediate and historical (large payouts, punches to the face, crowd chants… both in current bout and previous bout)
• Possible use of local rules showcasing emergent bout behavior (avoid punch or punch at X moment drawn out over time reveals overall bout outcome, boxer movement, energy depletion…)
• Readers would find the subject interesting outside of academics (boxing!)
• I can remove some of the variables and likely not lose a lot of the value of the research (I might be able to ignore culture/social status/marital problems/etc. and still build a reliable model of a boxing bout and hopefully draw some connections between behavior and cellular automata modeling)