Archive for the ‘Observations of some sort’ Category

Mac, a Hacker’s Choice.. (And Happy New Year!)

Friday, January 1st, 2010
VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
half an apple

Creative Commons License photo credit: waferboard

Happy new year everyone, hope that this year will be (even) better than the one before. Personally, I spend most of my christmas holidays reading the first book of the Millennium series of Stieg Larsson. Good book in the sense that I found it difficult to stop reading, bit the same that happened (at least to me) with Da Vinci Code.

There was one thing that kept on bothering me though. One of the main caracters in the book is a twentysome year old girl, Lisbeth Salander,who possess a somewhat difficult/dark past and seems to be living in the borders of the society, in a punkish kind a way. Among other things, the girl is an excellent hacker, whish is also where my doubts lie: she seems to be a devoted fan of Apple, or to put it more precisely, Apple’s laptops.

I know that Macs are very popular among designers and composers etc. for a good reason, as well as people who appreciate usability or just want to be cool. However, a hacker with Mac, I don’t know, to me it just seems a little bit odd. Furthermore, the book makes no reference (or at least very little) to Open Source based programmes etc. Then again, I am not an expert on hacking either, so who knows.

By the way, curiously enough, in the book all the bad guys use Windows..

VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Culture and Web Design

Monday, October 12th, 2009
VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

www

Back in Finland web design always used to pay quite a lot of attention to usability and functionality. Even though this might not always be so obvious in the final “product”, there seemed to be a generel agreement over this so called “nielsenian” approach, where the “cool design stuff” were often considered if not pointless, at least somewhat meaningless unless thet had some concrete task or mission to fulfill.

In practice that meant that especially Flash but also in many cases JavaScript -snippets, widgets and particles were often frowned upon. The reasoning behind this was pure pragmatism: some people might have had JavaScript disabled, or they might not have the Flash-player or even the necessary knowhow to install it. Furthermore, often these extra parts  brought no concrete benefits as such (besides the graphic design factor), only increased loading times and made the usability of the site more difficult. If the same could be said in simple text, then it was better to opt for the text.

The same applied for things such as entrance pages: if their only point was to welcome the visitor, then they had no point. Overall less was better, everything else was neither needed nor wanted, amounting to nothing more than kitsch. All sorts of movings of text, blinkings, additional pages etc. were seen as annoyence which one was better to stay away from.

Lately all this has changed a little bit, thanks to increased bandwiths and introduction/wider use of things such as Ajax, ActionScript etc. The general guideline still exists though, i.e. if you can live without, then that is the way to go. However, in the other end of Europe, in Spain, it seems this is not the case at all, or for that matter, never has been.

In Spain many of the sites seem to have an entrance page, or at least more “spectacular” index page. Flash is more widely used, and little visual tricks (change of opacity etc.) one can achieve with JavaScript are abundant. A page which has nothing extra, is seen often as boring and one that carries very little appeal. It is not enough for a site to provide only information, the design has to be up-to-date as well. Sometimes it is even the other way around, the info is outdated but the design not.

Pages that purely do their job are often considered boring here. That also means that people seem to stay away, the boringness of a site somehow deteriorates the page content as well. Things are especially bad if you are trying to sell something via your site, or the site works as a display window of your company. In Finland you might get by if your site looked a bit dull but worked (but not if it did not). In Spain it might be even more or less ok if things do not work 100%, but if they look bad visually, no matter if they work or not, success is an unlikely visitor. Then again, little movement, bright colors, fading or blinking images might just do the trick.

In one way or another this also reflects the cultural differences between the two countries as well. The appeal of things, how things look in general, are much more appreciated in here than in Finland. It might be a bit of an exaggeration, but the functioning of things does not have the same value as in Finland, or to put it another way, it might equally bad if things look bad. Surface is equal to what lies beneath.

I do not know if this is the case between other North/South European countries as well, or, where do the countries in the middle position themselves. In any case, if you are a Finn going Spain pay attention to not only how things are but also how things look. If vice versa, it might be a good idea to check how things are under the hood. In both cases, no worries, it is a ride worth taking.

VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

Related or not?

Monday, September 14th, 2009
VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Receiving Bill Clinton
Creative Commons License photo credit: jurvetson

Bit over a month ago Bill Clinton went to North Korea, had a talk with the country leader Kim Jong-il and came back with two pardoned US reporters, Laura Ling and Euna Lee. The journalists had been earlier captured, “trialed”, found guilty of hostile acts and entering illegally into the country and sentenced to 12 years in jail. By the time I found it a bit odd that the two got their freedom so smoothly, all it took was an ex-politician (even though a very significant one) to make a visit. What was it that North Korea won?

The possibly answers are surprisingly many, starting from reputation management abroad to propaganda material back home. Similar tactics have been used by Libya under Gaddafi, Iran with the resolution of the US embassy hostage crisis and few others as well. Still it seemed that just for good PR the liberation process seemed awfully easy, or at least quick, more like an exchange: North Korea got Bill Clinton for a visit, US their reporters. It is true that North Korea does not always seem to make much sense, but annulling a 12 year sentence just like that usually demands a little more than a visit, especially when it was described to be nothing more than “a private mission”.

Curiously enough, one month later the US has stated it’s readiness for direct talks with North Korea. This is exactly what North Korea has wanted for long, it is just that up till now the US has been more willing to favor the six-party talks and has declined the offer (example here). True, Obama has been more inclined to negoatiate than his predecessor (and that is not a bad thing). However, one cannot stop wondering about the coincidence of these two events, especially since already after two weeks of the release there were talks between US and North Korean officials where according to the US representative the latter was sending “good signals” to the former.

In any case, there is no harm in talking, at least better that than warfare. The only thing is that if there really is a connection between the two cases and this kind of “hostage diplomacy” on behalf of states becomes more of a norm than irregularity, well, I suppose it is not really the direction the democratic states want to be heading either. Bill Clinton might not be that happy either having his calendar filled with dictatorial dinners.

VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Breaking the Bedplate of Economics

Wednesday, September 9th, 2009
VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Shanghai skyline
Creative Commons License photo credit: johnkoetsier

As the Climate Conference of Copenhagen keeps approaching the conversation on who should do what and who pay for it all heats up as well. The argument coming from many of the developing countries (and up till recently the US and few other industrialized countries as well) is that tackling climate change is something they cannot afford. Furthermore, it has been stated by for example China that since a lot of this warming has been caused by the emissions made by developed countries historically they are also the ones who should fix it. The argument continues by saying that developing countries can take part, yet their primary concern lies in reaching same prosperity levels that people have accustomed  in the developed countries.

Nobody seems to really disagree about the overall importance of slowing down climate change. It just seems to be very much a question of financial resources, and as always, it seems to be the economy that has the upper hand over environment. Developing countries are not wrong either by stating the historical facts that point responsibility towards the industrialised countries. Something has already been to that, for example the EU set out a 15 bn € climate aid plan. It is very much under what the developing countries hoped for, but still a start (even though one could question some developing countries ability to make sure that money goes into good use).

Unfortunately, climate change is not a question on who is right and who is wrong. It is bound to take place no matter whose fault it turns out to be. Excuses won’t do any good either. The statement on “cannot afford” does not hold much water either, not on the long run. The view over economy prevailing over environment is even more ridiculous. One has to remember, that climate change as such has nothing to do with people’s right to get rich, even though indirectly it might seem so on short term. Curiously enough, if the climate changes ’sufficiently’ and environmental destruction keeps on continuing, it might make the question on who is rich and who is not even quite irrelevant.

How so? For one thing, putting economics on one side and environment on the other is a very outdated way to view the world. Tackling climate change comes with a cost, but according to the Stern review and others doing nothing is going to be even more expensive. Therefore, the latter option is simply bad business and bad for the development. Furthermore, the longer one waits the more one pays. Better still, wait long enough and there might be even no price to be paid anymore, since there is nothing or very little that can be done in the first place.

Second, as Stern and comp.  show with their report, economics and environment are not separated from each others, they are very much interconnected. Moreover, uncontrary to the understanding of many, it is the economics that is the luxury good in the world of environment, not vice versa. Our, and everybody’s economy is very much built on the proper working of the environment: to be able to work, start a business, do research one has to have air to breath, food to eat and water to drink, just to remain more or less healthy. All these things depend on the environment, more so than from the economics. Economies, big and small, developed and developing,  are ultimately built on the bedrock of the environment, not the other way around.

Thus, it makes little sense to argue whose fault is all this. No matter how justified that might be, at the moment it seems more of a luxury we can concentrate on after having first dealt with the problem itself. Furthermore, even for the developing countries (or especially for them) it makes good economic sense to participate in full in order to stop climate change and environmental degradation . China, among others, should do so already for its own sake, some years ago 16 of of the 20 most polluted cities in the world were in China, and river pollution threats sixth of its population.

Eventually it is of little use to have a nice car or a house or whatever if you cannot breath, drink or eat. And it might not be much better if you have to spend all the fortunes you made on a tank of fresh air and bottle of fresh water. Then again, who knows, if you are rich enough you just might be able to buy a decent carrot to go with that water.

VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)