sneaker.org

This week, I’m at the CHI conference in Montreal. This is my third CHI conference, in addition to hhaving attended numerous other peer-reviewed/academic conferences. And I realized while sitting in some of the sessions where were lets just say not-so-interesting to put it mildly, that I would prefer a slightly (well, radically) different format for academic/perr-reviewed conferences.

Most major conferences now have multiple parallel tracks. CHI has 9 parallel tracks running concurrently with 5 different courses. So all in all, you can chose to be in one of 14 different places. The opportunity cost of missing some talks is high but unfortunately, since one doesn’t know which ones are the ones worth listening to, it’s ultimately an educated guess (some wouls call it more like a crap shoot, but it’s not really all that bad).

By the time a paper is presented at a conference there is nothing a person in the audience can really say or do in order to change that in any way. Regardless of how critical the comments may be, the paper/poster has already been published and is hence been condemned to be around forever. Since the paper has already gone through a peer-review process, I am willing to trust the judgement (though some would question that, but bear with me for a minute) of the reviewers who accepted the paper to have verified the methodology and the details presented in the paper. Therefore, there is no reaosn for me to have to sit through a half hour (20 minutes presentation and 10 minute Q&A) on a paper. Instead all I really care about is what is the motivation/topic for the paper, what was built/tested/evaluated and what teh results were. 5 minutes at the most. The 5 minute presentation is sufficient to present a summary of the work. Anyone who is interested in the work, can read the paper and/or then meet with the presenter during his/her designated “discussion time” (no paper presentations should be on at the same time).

Back to the question of whether or not to trust the reviewers’ judgements — once the paper has already been accepted there is very little accountability in a public forum for the quality of the paper or the presentation. Therefore, rather than spend the time to listen to all the details, I prefer getting the executive summary and then having the opportunity to interact with the presenter in a special public Q&A session.

To that effect, I would also like to see some kind of accountability on the quality of the paper or presentation after the conference. Under the current system, while members of the audience can ask insightful questions, that interaction is not captured other than in the memories of others who were present and happened to be listening. It would be interesting to have members of the community post their critiques or questions in a public forum — similar to comment son a blog entry. Along the same lines I would also be in favor of having the paper reviewers comments and the authors rebuttal available since the real value in research is not just what actually gets published, but in the back-and-forth that happens between the community.

So here is what I would propose:
1) No paper presentation to exceed 5 minutes, maybe even 3 minutes.
2) Single (or at least fewer) track paper presentations so that one can at least get a comprehensive overview of all the papers in the conference.
3) The paper, abstract, reviews and rebuttals posted on a website, which allows others to view them and comment on them.
4) A designated “discussion session” for the paper, which is more interactive. Those who wish to question the methods or results can read the paper and then come and participate in the discussion. Those who wish to just listen and absorb are welcome as well. A scribe should be present to capture the interaction of the discussion so that it too can be archived along with the paper.

These are of course thoughts in progress, but I’d be happy to discuss them with anyone who is interested.

The birth of the Internet and of computer networks in general was fueled by the existence of the telephone network. The acoutic couplers and the modems became the way the masses got connected to a common network. However, that transformation is now long gone. The Internet has become ubiquitous. The driving need for people to communicate is what caused the formation of the PSTN network. The existence of the PSTN network fueled the growth of the data network. But now, this are going the other way. The PSTN network is slowly giving way and the data network is becoming more pervasive. In the early days, data rode on the voice network. Now, with the emergence of Skype and services like Vonage it is voice that is riding on data. My own company has developed a conferencing switch which is oblivious to whether the end-points connecting to it are traditional phone, bundled phone (T1) or IP. VoIP is finally here and it is here to stay.

In my previous post, I talked about the latest Supreme Court ruling being a slippery slope. And I was afraid of what would happen if Bush got to choose another justice for the supreme court. Unfortunately, with Sandra Day O’Connor resigning that is what is going to happen. I heard Justice O’Connor at the commencement speech at Stanford last year and was very impressed. Sorry to see her leave and even more sorry at the realization that the current POTUS is probably going to choose yet another christian conservative to the open position in the Supreme Court.

Some of the recent ruling of the US Supreme Court are just so apalling to me. Take this one for instance from yesterday (June 23, 2005): The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, in one of its most closely watched property rights cases in years, that fostering economic development is an appropriate use of the government’s power of eminent domain.. That is just crazy. In a country that is supposedly built on the the foundations of freedom and the right of ownership, this really doesn’t seem right to me.

Ebay has been the undisputed leader of all the survived the dot-com boom. It is a compnay that has single handedly changed the landscape of the marketplace for so many industries. In fact, I recently finished reading The Perfect Store: Inside EBay by Adam Cohen. It really was an interesting read and a valuable insight into Ebay’s “community”. In the book Cohen argues that Ebay’s greatest asset is it’s community. He also talks about Ebays “feedback system” or what is more generically known as a reputation system as a way for the Ebay community to self-police itself (for the most part at least).

Inspired by the book, I decided to give Ebay a new spin. And so recently I pulled out some old items which I wasn’t using any more and mostly as an experiment proceeded to sell them on EBay. I also purchaed several items on Ebay and found some good deals and had an overall positive experience. However, in my non-scientific re-evaluation of Ebay, I also uncovered some peeves which I felt compelled to share:

1) Site Design and Usability: For a site that does so much in revenue, it is my personal opinion, that Ebay’s site and usability leave a lot to be desired. I have actually heard talks from usablty folks at Ebay when they have come and presented at Stanford and they do a very good job of explaining why making changes to Ebay’s interface has a very high switching cost for the company and for its community. The old dogs and the Ebay addicts have learnt how the site works and making any changes is akin to playing with fire, for fear of inflaming the community opinion or breaking the various screen-scrapers that are out there working trolling the ebay pages.

However, though that is formidable problem, I do feel that there are things that Ebay can do in order to make changes and yet potentially maintain backwar compatibility for a period of time and then phasing out old systems through a retirement program. A classic example that illustrates my point is EBay’s Chat. I feel that given my background in the area I’m somewhat qualified to pick a fight on this. The technology that Ebay is using for it’s chat system is so 1994-1995. There have been so many advances since then, but Ebay’s system seems to be caught in its own little world where time stands still.

2) The interface for posting items for sale — and the overall presentation of the items on the website can use a huge facelift. There is no reason that a seller should need to add a counter, or the fact that the counter should be a gif image — again technology reminescent of a decade ago. The overall experience of posting an item for selling and that of actually browsing and biding can be improved so much by making little changes and most of all embracing new technology.

3) Auctions can get pretty fancy. But on Ebay, you cannot extend an auction into overtime. This is what encourages sniping. In my opinion sniping goes agaist the very fabric of the principles EBay’s founders claimed to found the company on. If the objective is to create the most efficint marketplace, by allowing sniping (I’m not saying it should be stopped altogether, but that there should at least be the option for sellers to do an auto-extend on auctions till such time thre has been no more biding for a certain delta of time) then the market is not efficint any more. Some sellers are not getting the optimal value (and in fact it is so surprising that Ebay doesn’t do this because it should imply a significant increase in the value of the transaction and hence and increae int he revenue for EBay) and som buyers are losing auctions because they weren’t allowed to bid further even though they may be willing to do so.

4) My final and most crucial gripe is how EBay’s feedback system is flawed and is prone to feedbac which is quid-pro-quo. I recently engaged in a transaction on EBay in which the seller did not ship the items in a timely manner. My attempts to contact the seller initially went unheard. I did eventually receive the product, but a couple of weeks late which in turn had an impact on the schedule I was attempting to meet for a research project. Consequntly, I made the decision to leave negative feedback for the seller, but with the appropriate comment that it was for poor communication and late shipment. The seller in return left negative feedback for me and thereafter, promptly submitting a request for mutual withdrawal. So by now the flaw should be aparent - If one side had a negative experience, but the other party upheld it’s part of the bargain (in my case paying as soon as the auction ended) that feedback doesn’t often come out in the system because both parties know that a negative feedback will probably result in a retaliatory negative feedback. This form of feedback-blackmail as I like to call it, results in a back-scratching quid-pro-quo which undermines the integrity of a reputation system. As I explained to the seller in my transaction, I will not succumb to such arm-twisting and withdrawing an honest and factual negativ feedback simply in response to a negative feedback would be a disservice to the EBay community.

What Ebay has going fo it is critical mass, however, if such little issues are not addresed over time (and a decade is a long time) then slowly the rust catches up with the tanker and it start to take on water…

Thoughts?

When I was a kid, my mom and my sister were talking about four-letter words. I didn’ know what a four-letter word was and so I innocently asked: “But M-A-N-U is also a four letter word?”. But today, while watching the presidential debate, I couldn’t help thinking that there is very soon going to be a new four-letter word added to the global vocabulary and it is: B-U-S-H. And it will very likely be used with the same oomph as the other popular four letter word. I can just hear it now: “Man, he really bushed that up.”

My contempt for George Bush as the leader of the United States and as such a man in one of the most powerful political positions in the world is monotonically increasing. The more I see of him or hear of him, the more apalled I am as to how such an individual can be the president of the united states. He continues to harp on the same theme, but refuses to address the questions inspired by fact. Yes, you want to stay firm and be commited and be stadfast and resolute and strong and all that, but you also have to be open to reason and be able to admit when you make a mistake and take corrective action instead of constantly perpetuating the same fallacies.

Fortunately or unfortunately (honestly I don’t know which) I cannot vote in the United States, but to all those who can: “Don’t bush it up again”.

A while ago, I wrote about something called the Hedonic Assymetry — one of Frijda’s Laws of Emotion which basically had a very sad outcome — one that says that Humans can never be happy since eventually they always want more, always want a change.

Recently, I’ve been making it a point of going out clubbing in San Francisco every weekend. Not because I like clubbing — honestly, I like it maybe only 30% of the time that I go. I’ve also noticed that my pool of single friends is significantly dwindling. I guess that is purely a function of age. It’s amazing as to how many of my friends are now couples. Some are married, some have just been together long enough that you treat them like they’re maried. To me there is no difference between the two since marriage is just a silly formality perpetuted by society. I personally would be very happy to see gay marriage be legalized in the US since for me it would make the definition of marriage more legal and practical and less “oo-la-la” as it is today.

Anyhow, what I started to write about was that I’ve actually gone clubbing/drinking with some coupled friends of mine — and invariably they say that you are so lucky to be single. And I invariably tell them that they are wrong — well, not wrong but there are positives and negatives to both.

But most of my coupled friends always talk about the ‘thrill of the hunt’ in not so many words — that there are so many beautiful women out there in the land of the single folks. Having been single for a while I can look at if from the perspective of the single person as well and say that yeah, there may be a lot of opportunity, but it’s also incredibly stressful and often frustrating. Yes, sometimes it’s fun too, but it’s certainly no absolute that the state of single-dom is better than the state of couple-dom.

I guess the whole discussion just reminds me of the hedonic asymmetry yet again that humans are never happy in whatever state they are — they alwas crave something different. True, but somehwat sad.

I gave up watching TV about a year and half ago now. At the time I used to sleep with the TV on most of the night. The drone of Jay Leno and the utterly annoying cackle of Conan O’brien would be the last thing I heard while I dozed into a stupor, only to awake at some point in the middle of the night or early morning to turn the TV off. Certainly not the way I’d like to fall asleep, but hey, it was how it was for a while since the TV was the only source of faking life in my environment.

The reason I gave up TV was because I told myself that this was unhealthy and I should start forcing myself to go out more. So one fine day when I returned from a trip home to find that my TV have been conveniently relocated to the office in my absence for use with the video-conferencing unit, I was relieved in a way. My co-workers had helped me take the first step in something I was contemplating, but hadn’t done yet.

I successfully spent the next several months — till last month in fact without watching TV (except for a couple of days of CNN at the time of the Columbia disaster). But then I finally gave in and decided to go buy an antenna so I can re-educate myself on the pop-culture that is telivision — it’s off to hear people talking about shows that I have never heard of, let alone spent any time watching.

So now, a couple of weeks later, I’m surprised at what happened to TV in the past year and half. Every show on TV is some twist on a reality show or a game show or some combination of the two. Whether it is Last Comic Standing, American Junior, Fear Factor (and those are just the names I remember… I don’t even remember the ones for the various shows with guys trying to pick out girls and vice versa or the reality version of homicide), every show on TV sems to have the same theme — reality TV meets gameshow.

What’s really happening here? Our lives are enough of a competition anyway. For everything. For every little thing. And yes, I — a otherwise highly competitive person — am getting a little sick of it all. TV used to be a refuge — a refuge from reality. Where things were funny, made up and just for laughs. Now, the laughs come from watching one group of people gang up on and be nasty towards others. Competition has gone from being healthy competition to being humiliation. Do we really get our kicks from humiliation?

And the whole obsession with Reality TV — pioneered by MTV but now so omnipresent that you cannot escape it. Get with the program folks — it is NOT freaking REAL. It is still “made up” and directed. The rules are contrived to make people fight with each other and to create explosive situation, because that is what sells. It is not real. And what you see is the edited version so that it is hot, spicy and exciting. It is fake. It is worse than fake — because it’s brought to you under the garb of being real.

I don’t know about you, but I certainly want a break from the competition, a break from the facades and a break from the fake-reality. I guess I just want the real fake.

I received the following profile survey from a friend of mine (Paul H.) in June 2001. They sat in my mailbox for 2 years and then I finally responded to them just for fun. Here are the responses.

1. LIVING ARRANGEMENT?

Single. One-Bedroom Cottage.

2. WHAT BOOK ARE YOU READING NOW?

None recently. But I’d like to believe I’m reading G.E.B. (Godel, Escher Bach) since it’s a book I’ve wanted to read for a long time, but never quite made it further than the foreword yet!

3. WHAT’S ON YOUR MOUSE PAD?

Umm… nothing, just a concentric pattern. The one at my office was more fun. It said: Size does matter.

4. FAVORITE BOARD GAME?

Life — I think that’s what it was called. Played it when I was a kid. It was something where you had to choose a certain number of points for Happiness, Fame and Fortune and the objective was to get to that number of points as you play the game. Only played it once when I was maybe 6 or 7, but I still remember it. Anyone know what it was really called or where I can get it.

5. FAVORITE MAGAZINE?

Umm… Don’t really read any. But if I had to pick one I would say Business 2.0 and Inc.

6a. FAVORITE SMELLS?

Sweet perfume on a gorgeous woman or Hot Chocolate Souffle baking.

6b. LEAST FAVORITE SMELLS?

Seafood or really smelly seafood.

7. FAVORITE SOUND?

Running water (in a stream, not a tap!)

8. WORST FEELING IN THE WORLD?

Being cheated (in more than one context)

9. WHAT IS THE FIRST THING YOU THINK OF WHEN YOU WAKE UP IN THE MORNING?

What do I have to do for the day or did I oversleep already!?

10. FAVORITE COLOR?

Used to be black, but now I think it is green.

11. HOW MANY RINGS BEFORE YOU ANSWER THE PHONE?

Depends who is calling. Sometimes I don’t answer it at all. Caller id rocks.

12. FUTURE Child’s NAME?

Don’t need one since I don’t plan on having any “future child” as yet. Maybe later. But I’ll take it as my future dog’s name and it will most likely be ‘pi’ (3.14159)

13. WHAT IS MOST IMPORTANT IN LIFE?

Personal happiness from being rational.

14. FAVORITE FOODS?

Chocolate (good chocolate.. not Hershey’s… Hershey’s sucks. Lindt, Godiva or Swiss chocolate)

15. CHOCOLATE OR VANILLA?

duh… chocolate.

16. DO YOU LIKE TO DRIVE FAST?

Yes, but that rational side of me says that it’s not worth the risk of getting a ticket or getting points on my license. The safety side is not as much of a risk as the ticket since that is something that depends on your skill as a driver.

17. DO YOU SLEEP WITH A STUFFED ANIMAL?

Do I look that prissy to you? (hello, no)

18. STORMS - COOL OR SCARY?

Both. But more cool than scary.

19. WHAT TYPE WAS YOUR FIRST CAR?

A 1988 Toyota Corolla

20. MEET ONE PERSON DEAD OR ALIVE?

Richard Feynman — to be able to judge for myself if he was really as cool as his books make him sound. I doubt it.

21. FAVORITE ALCOHOLIC DRINK?

Kiwi Margaritas.

22. WHAT IS YOUR ZODIAC SIGN?

Are you kidding? Zodiacs are for people who don’t know any better.

23. DO YOU EAT THE STEMS OF BROCCOLI?

Hell no.

24. IF YOU COULD HAVE ANY JOB YOU WANTED WHAT WOULD IT BE?

I have it. Because I don’t have jobs. I make jobs.

25. IF YOU COULD DYE YOUR HAIR ANY COLOR WHAT WOULD IT BE?

hmm… been thinking about this one. I might try something crazy just to shock people. But otherwise, I wouldn’t dye my hair at all.

26. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN IN LOVE?

Yes.

27. IS THE GLASS HALF EMPTY OR HALF FULL?

Both or Neither. Anyone who says empty or full isn’t considering both options. And anyone who doesn’t say Both or Neither isn’t considering all perspctives.

28. FAVORITE MOVIES: The Usual Suspects, The Shawshank Redepmtion, Beethoven

29. DO YOU TYPE WITH YOUR FINGERS ON THE RIGHT KEYS? Nope

30. WHAT’S UNDER YOUR BED? Nothing.

31. WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE NUMBER? 2 - the smallest prime

32. FAVORITE SPORT TO WATCH? none

33. SAY ONE NICE THING ABOUT THE PERSON WHO SENT THIS TO YOU: ha ha…

34. FROM THE PEOPLE YOU EMAILED THIS TO-WHO IS MOST LIKELY TO RESPOND?. None. Because I don’t forward chain mails.

35. FROM THE PEOPLE YOU EMAILED THIS TO-WHO IS LEAST LIKELY TO RESPOND? None. Because I don’t forwrd chain mails.

36. WHY DID YOU FILL THIS OUT? I was bored while sitting at the car dealership getting my car serviced, plus the email had been sitting in my inbox way too long.

37. IF YOU COULD BE ONE FRUIT, ONE ANIMAL, AND ONE POSSESSION OF YOURS, WHAT

WOULD YOU BE (one answer for each)? A Kiwi (it’s roungh ont he outside, soft andbeautiful on the inside), A dog (that one’s easy), My computer (it can’t think, but it is most logical — it’s that an oxymoron)

Some time ago, I wrote about dreams - about how it is my belief that dreams are nothing more than a rambling of thoughts in a fairly unconnected and meaningless manner. Recently, however, I was introduced to the concept of “lucid dreaming” — or when you consciously know that you are dreaming. Lucid dreaming can be very interesting from the point of view that you can control your experience in the dream. I think of it as — dreams are still meaningless mind-chatter, but if you have a little conscious choreography, you essentially can make the randomness simulate an experience you may want to have. Interesting.

Of course i didn’t wake up this morning thinking about lucid dreaming. But I did wake up because I was having a dream that seemed too good to be true. It was kind of like waking up from a nightmare, except it was the exact oppostite of a nightmare, something that was so good that consciously or sub-consciously I was incredulous. Though the content of the dream remains something that I would not share on here, I do hope that even though I haven’t committed it to writing it is something that I remember.

The theme however was interesting. I have very few regrets. I try to keep things that way. But I do have one or two. One which goes back as far as being in tenth grade in high school — where I should have responded to a little note. But in this dream, I was basically correcting that regret. In fact it wasn’t me who was correcting it. The protagonist was someone else, but the end result was that it was reversing the result of my inaction and leading to an end result which was exactly how I would have wished, or rather I did wish. May be I still do. Either way, it was by far one of the most memorable dreaming experiences — still random, still meaningless mind-chatter, but a scintillating virtual memory of what could have been.

N.U.: “And were you ever going to tell me this?”