1.  They are under 30 years old.

2.  They are uneducated.

3.  They have kids.

A new study has revealed that while anger is a common emotion in all people, those who fall into the above group are more likely to be angry more often then those who aren’t in those groups.

It makes sense to us.  Apart from the obvious financial concerns of those who are young and uneducated, having kids when you don’t have a lot of options or money has got to be tough.   Worrying about someone else’s life when yours isn’t going as well as you like, that can’t be easy.

But it makes us think of a conversation we had with a friend of ours.  She is a substance abuse counselor, and in talking about what makes her job rewarding/difficult, she told us that invariably it is the stupid clients who are the most frustrating.  Ok, that might be a little crass.  But it’s true.

Smarter people are better able to understand their own emotions and can adapt or change the way they react to things more readily than those who aren’t smart.  The less intelligent feel the same things (be it anger or anything else) but aren’t as well equipped to handle them.

(Photo courtesy dboy’s flickr page.)

According to the report, about half of all peer reviewed, scientific research papers published around the world aren’t true. (No, we aren’t going to get into the self-referential questions of whether the paper itself is true, so shut up.)  A variety of problems contribute to the errors, mostly; poor study design, small sample sizes, selective reporting and others.

And while no one factor is causally identified, the combination of errors means that those studies which have found statistically significant results (results that can be shown to be large enough to not be the result of random factors) are, half of the time, not significant.

Studies in ‘hot’ fields–where multiple teams are competing against one another–tend to be even less reliable, and studies with small sample sizes are even worse.

We know what you’re thinking: you knew it all along.  Scientists don’t have any answers, they just pretend like they do. After all, how many times do you hear about a study that says one thing while another a few months later says the opposite?

But, we have to ask, isn’t that kind of the point?  Isn’t research a venture into the unknown? And aren’t wrong conclusions sort of expected?

Well, not really.  But it is contagious, at least as far as social circles are concerned.

The study showed that people tend to be happier when they associate with people who are happy.  Essentially, if you have happy friends, you too will be happy.

And though the corollary didn’t show as strong a relationship (being around sad people doesn’t necessarily make you sad), there was a clear indication of an increase in happiness up to the third degree of separation.  How much? Look at these numbers:

• First degree of separation (Immediate contact): Increase your happiness chances by 15%.
• Second degree of separation (Friend of a friend): 10% increase.
• Third degree of separation:  (Friend of a friend of a friend): 6% increase.

And while having more friends also increased your chances, the deciding factor was whether or not you had happy friends.

Which brings us to our question:  Do you have a duty to be happy? If your happiness increases the happiness of others, and by inference, makes everyone’s life better, do you have an obligation to be happy?

If it isn’t a duty (ethical or moral), is it just a good idea to surround yourself with better (i.e. happier) friends? Quality over quantity seems to be the deciding factor in increasing your chances at happiness.   If you want to increase your chances at happiness, it seems like you’d be better off getting rid of the downers in your life.

And on that note, we’ll say:  Excelsior, True Believers!

(Photo courtesy Swami Stream’s Flickr page.  Thanks, Swami Stream!)

Robots

So we know it’s been a while.  But give us a break, we were…uh…reincarnated, taken by aliens, busy traveling back and forth from Colombia as drug mules, abducted by robots.   Yes.  Abducted.

By robots.

Yeah.  Really smart robots that can think for themselves.   In fact, they’re so smart that since releasing us from their evil island robot lair they’ve gone to work for several government agencies, TV shows and scientific research institutes as autonomous researchers capable of thinking for themselves.

Okay, we made some of that up.  In fact, we pretty much made all of it up.

Except for the part about the robots that think for themselves.

On Thursday, two separate research teams reported that they had created robots that could form their own hypothesis, test them, and then learn from what they observed.

Take a moment to let that sink in.

We aren’t exactly fear mongers around here.  Usually we try to remain level headed, easy going, quick with a joke type people.  And then we came across this section of the report:

“Just by crunching the numbers — and without any prior instruction in physics — the Cornell machine was able to decipher Isaac Newton’s laws of motion and other properties.”

That seems pretty impressive to us.  Even if you only count since humanity has been agrarian, it took us–people–about 10,000 years to come up with Newtonian physics.  These robots came up with it in what, a couple of days?  A week? A few hours?

We have no idea.  But by our calculations, the robots will be taking over next Thrusday, around tea time.

And we welcome our new robotic overlords. We remind them that as trusted blogers we can be used to spread their commandments and round up human slaves for work in their silicone and robot wig factories.

Hail Robots!

I remember once taking a class where one of the lessons was to rank a list of supplies in order of their importance if you were stranded on a desert island.  The list was given to Navy personnel (or maybe it was NASA, I forget that too) and consisted of about 50 items.  The items I remember were these:

• Compass
• Flashlight
• Bottles of water
• Radio, not working
• Umbrella
• Sextant
• Food rations
• Sunscreen
• Small mirror
• Bible
• Plastic jug
• Fishing tackle

When making their list, most people place food and water near the top.  But as I remember, the items on the top of the list as put together by the experts consisted of signaling devices like the mirror.  The theory being that you don’t really want to try to survive on your own at sea (or anywhere else), and your best chance at living is rescue.

Never the less, we came up with a list of items we’d want with us if stranded on a desert island.  Here is the non-signaling device list.

1.  Knife: Because you can use a knife for a lot, like making a shelter, hunting or spear-fishing, etc.
 
 
 
 
 
 



2.  Hand-powered water maker: One of these would come in really handy, especially in the hot climate of a desert island.  You can go a long time without food, but you can’t go more than a few days without water.  With these, you can make enough water to survive on, and all you need is two hands and an ocean.  (Check!)
 
 
 
 
 
 



3.  Plastic tarp or trash bags. Very useful to stay dry, and for a whole lot of other uses.
 
 
 
 
 
 


4.  Fishing Tackle: We have to eat too, and the ocean has fish in it, or so we hear.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


5.  Lighter: We like sushi, but not all the time.  Besides, a fire provides warmth, light and psychological comfort. And you can cook over it.

When the police get involved, it is serious.  Always.  Why?

• They have guns.

• They can arrest you.

• They can detain you, intimidate you and make your life hell.

In short, the police have more power than you.  They are not your equals.   Because of that, we came up with the following reasons for why you should never, EVER talk to the police.  (At least in the Unites States.)

REASON 1:  IT NEVER HELPS: Lots of people like to think they can talk their way out of getting arrested.  Maybe you can.  But if you are charged with a crime, talking to the police hurts you.   What you say can be used against you, but it isn’t going to be used to help you.

REASON 2:  YOU CAN TALK LATER: If you are guilty and want to confess, wonderful.  You are a good person.  But confessing has consequences, and you need to be aware of them.  Not only that, but you only want to confess to what you did, and you need to be sure of what you say. Think first.  Talk later.

REASON 3:  NOTHING IS OFF THE RECORD: Nothing you say to the police is out of bounds.  Even if you agree to keep it ‘off the record’ or ‘just between us’, it isn’t.  It’s going to be used, recorded, remembered and used against you at every opportunity.

REASON 4:  COPS CAN LIE.  YOU CAN’T: If a cop lies to you, it’s fine. They can do that.  If you lie to the cops, you commit a crime: obstruction of justice.  Not only that, but you will be seen as a liar and the rest of what you say is worthless.

REASON 5:  EVEN AN HONEST MISTAKE IS BAD: Everything you tell to the police has to be true.  Even if you make a mistake, this can be construed as a lie.  If you have to testify and what you said to the cops is brought into court and it’s full of holes, you are going to look bad.  NOT something you want to happen.

REASON 6:  YOU DON’T KNOW ANYTHING: Did you know it’s illegal to own a lobster that is below a certain size, or that you can’t play dominoes on a Sunday in Georgia?  If you don’t already know every law on the books, you may admit to doing something you didn’t even know was illegal.  And yes, there are a lot of things that are illegal you don’t even know about it.   How many?  About 10,000 or more federal criminal statutes alone. And that doesn’t include local and state laws, and or regulatory rules.

REASON 7:  THE 5TH AMENDMENT PROTECTS THE INNOCENT: The Supreme Court has said this themselves.  The 5th Amendment is there so innocent people don’t get caught up in the very serious, stressful process of a criminal investigation.  Innocent people are worth protecting. That’s why the 5th Amendment is there.  Use it.

REASON 8: THE POLICE AND WITNESSES CAN BE WRONG: If the police get it wrong and you suddenly find yourself having to say X and the cop says Y, who is going to believe you?  You are accused of the crime.  Everyone expects you to lie, even if you are not lying and never did anything wrong.

REASON 9:  EVERYONE THINKS YOU DID IT: Innocent until proven guilty is a nice idea, but it isn’t quite real.  Think about it, how many times do you see or hear of someone being arrested and think “It has to be proven they’re guilty.”  Never. And everyone is just like you.   If you have to go in front of a jury, they already think “They’re probably guilty.”

REASON 10:  THE POLICE HAVE THE POWER: Let’s say you and a friend get into a scuffle.   Your friends says he won’t “press charges” and neither will you.  Super.  But your friend never could “press charges” even if they wanted to.  Only the police and prosecutors can, even if no one wants them to.

Of course, this doesn’t mean you should report a crime or not call 911 if you are in trouble.  But it does mean that if you get pulled over for a ticket or get into a car accident, you should probably just say “No thanks, I’ll get back to you later.’

(Photo courtesy pena2’s Flickr page, through creative commons license.  Thanks, pena2!)

And in case you forgot, here is what the old (Akon) theme looked like:

Our Blog with the Akon theme

They don’t have powers, they haven’t been bitten by radioactive spiders, and they aren’t mutants. And though we don’t want to be accused of being anti-mutite (though in all fairness, those people do have their own school), we’re wondering what kind of person waks up one day and says “You know, a latex costume, helmet and cape sounds like something I want to integrate into my life.”

Not to overgeneralize, but here’s a brief list of the kinds of people we think are attracted to this…uh….job?

1. People in Need of Career Counseling: If you think fighting crime is something you want to do, perhaps you should consider a job in law enforcement. If you see crime as a problem and believe the solution is making a bright costume and coming up with a catchy name and or sidekick, you look at things very differently than most people.

2. People With Otherwise Dreary Jobs: Ever been to the Ren-Fest? We went once. ONCE! And we got the feeling that a lot of the really committed participants engage in this fantasy world creation for the simple reason that they don’t have much else going on in their life. Superhero? We don’t even want to know what is so lacking in your life you have to come up with something like that to take up the time.

3. Socially Mal-Adjusted: Okay, this one is probably pretty harsh, but we think it’s accurate. How many of the people who hang around comic book stores are, shall we say, less than socially acute? The vast majority of the people in this population are probably going to be hesitant when pursuing their passions turns into adopting a fantasy as their real life. But given the underlying population is probably on the lower end of the socially adept scale of things, what kind of people are the subset of those who take that next step and live their lives in that fantasy?

We know this post probably seems critical, but it’s not aimed at mockery. It’s a legitimate question to ask: What makes a person want to adopt what is, to the vast majority of people, a fantasy identity?

(Photo courtesy dougward’s Flickr page, license through Creative Commons. Thanks, dougward!)

Feel free to contact us, leave comments and let us know what you think of the site.  We always love hearing from you.