In case you haven’t been living in Mars for the past week, you may have heard about Google’s giant Facebook competitor, Google+. Disclosed and released to the public end of June, Google+ came strong, mimicking Facebook’s stream post/comment/like style, but adding lots of interesting new features, notably the ability to organize your contacts in separate circles.

Those of you that still remember Google Wave may agree that having lots bells and whistles is not necessarily guarantee for success. Yes, Google+ Circles indeed solves lots of privacy problems in an elegant way, as opposed to Facebook’s single all-friends-included stream — great news for the millions of teenagers prevented from sharing their party pictures because they have their parents in their friends list. Let’s not forget Google Wave did also solve lots of problems inherent to e-mail, but still that was not sufficient to move enough people over.

Then comes Google+ Hangout to the equation. Hangout is a web integrated group video chat app which flawlessly supports up to 10 people simultaneously streaming in a single session. Hard to ignore, its button appears prominently in bold green on a page that is otherwise colored almost completely black on white with some hints of blue and red here and there. Among the technical features one that stands out is Hangout’s capability of dynamically switching the main video stream to the camera of whoever is talking at the moment — by the way, did I already mention that up to 10 people can video chat simultaneusly?

Still the reason why I think Hangout is Google+’s killer app is not technical, but strategical. In my opinion they have found a clever way to solve a fundamental problem of video chat. If you have ever seriously tried to use Apple’s Facetime to make and receive calls you may already guess what I am going to talk about. Receiving an un-programmed video call from someone out of nowhere more often than not makes the receiver feel terribly awkward. Skype tackles the problem a little by allowing people to start up by exchanging text messages, or maybe chatting via audio only, to only then, if both parts agree, escalate to a full video chat. Starting a Skype call directly into video is against etiquette, sometimes even regarded as an insult.

Google+ Hangout is nothing like that. Instead of “making a call” directed at some specific person, one simply “hangs out” and patiently waits for friends to join — No need for intention or purpose. Your friends will join if they want and when they want, giving them enough time to “check their hair” for instance. This may seem like a small thing, but it is not, and here comes why: Not only this eliminates the awkwardness surrounding the act of requesting video calls, but this also creates the opportunity for meeting new people.

A few days ago I was visiting Google+ for the first time. Having just accepted an invitation (they were still open) I had no more than a single friend in my circles. When I loaded Google+ on my browser the first thing I noticed was this message inviting me to hangout with my friend and 5 other people. I clicked and suddenly there I was participating in a dynamic video chat with a friend and 5 strangers, friends of him and friends of friends of him. Lots of jokes, camera on the guy telling the joke, laughs, camera on the girl laughing, people leaving, others joining, dynamic, interactive, fun! The camera switching and the interactions were incredibly natural, just like meeting friends in a corridor when you are on your way to somewhere: you stop by, say hello, get introduced to someone you didn’t know in the circle, chat a little, then say good bye and leave, and this goes on and on, with different people joining and leaving until the group eventually disperses.

I’ve already seen how Facebook comments could let me meet new interesting people. You comment on your friend’s post, then your friend’s friend comments back, and all of a sudden you may find yourself in an interesting discussion with someone you didn’t know, and with whom you happen to have a friend in common. Well, Google+ Hangout brings this game to a whole new level. I have heard of people comparing it to Chat Roulette, and indeed I can see the connection, but since you will at least have friends in common to anyone in the chat you will be less likely to be “nexted” in a matter of seconds, much less likely to endup seeing the private parts of another man — unless your friends are into this sort of thing, of course.

Below a video demonstration of Google+ Hangout by Lifehacker Team. See their original post here.

Edit: Read also Jenna Wortham’s article in The New York Times, published while I was writing this.

chat roulette · google+ · hangout · video call · video chat · video conference · webcam

The other day at a restaurant:

Me: “Do you serve vegetarian dishes?“
Clerk: “At this time we only have A La Minuta” – a typical local dish which usually includes some kind of meat, egg, rice, lettuce, tomatoes and fries.
Me: “Oh… I see… Could you by any chance make it without meat and egg then?“
The clerk goes inside the kitchen, talks to the chef, and comes back: “Yes, we can.“
Me: “Great, then I will have one please.“
Clerk: “Chicken A La Minuta or Beef A La Minuta?“
Me: “Huh? Hmm… Do I have to choose what kind of meat I will NOT eat?“

True story.

*note: both dishes were otherwise identical

diet · restaurant · vegan · vegetarian

Take a good look at those hands. They are the aged hands of a man who worked hard and passionately on farming and husbandry during his entire life. But contrary to what those brute hands may suggest, our dear Uncle Antonio was generous and kindhearted. Always wearing the smile of a little boy, he spoke with a soft voice and polite language. He loved taking care of his crops and animals. Determined to maintain his way of life, he did not want to live in the city. He was just as stubborn about his heart condition. Uncle Antonio died at the age of 85 of a fulminant heart attack, just a few minutes after running after an insubordinate working bull.

Uncle Antonio was lucky for having the privilege of what some may consider “a good death”. One may argue, with reason, that there is no such thing: a good death is no death at all. However death is an essential fact of life which cannot be denied. Can you imagine that you, me and all the people we know and love, including the children, are very likely to be dead within the next 8 decades or so? Think of your family, your friends, your husband or wife, of your sons and daughters, everybody. Knowing they will die, how would you like them to do so?

Unfortunately, as we control more and more acute diseases, we end up increasing the chances of a painful lingering death. Why? The answer is simple: death is considered defeat. Our modern medicine is in denial. Sure, science has shown tremendous progress in pain relief with drugs ranging all the way from analgesics and antidepressants to morphine, but pulling the plug is not an option. Having the choice, doctors will likely favor the suffering of a long delayed death, a path that will consume and destroy one’s body, mind and resources, making friends and relatives suffer along. People with the best of intentions end up doing atrocious things.

Those who knew Uncle Antonio would agree it is almost impossible to even imagine him confined indoors, sitting on a chair, watching TV all day long. He probably could not imagine this situation either. No, not him. He had to go on with his crops and animals, being genuinely himself until his very last breath. His death was certainly not gentle, but at least it was quick; a prize he got for being stubborn and ignoring medical advice.

Is this aways the case? Well, not quite. Not so long ago my wife’s cat got terribly ill. The vet gave no reasonable chance of recovery, and offered the possibility of at least giving it a gentle death. My wife was desolate, but she agreed that was the reasonable thing to do. She prepared her beloved pet a perfect feast. She cried, she petted and talked to it, with all care and affection the moment deserved. A few hours later the vet arrived with a syringe. In a matter of seconds it was all over. Yes, a merciful death is a privilege reserved for our pets.

Am I talking about euthanasia here? Well, maybe, but we don’t even have to go that far. I am talking about one’s right of being stubborn and genuine like Uncle Antonio. I am talking about one’s right to listen, but then knowingly ignore medical advice. The elder may get sick and fragile, but they are not our children to be told what to do. Sure, give them your advice, but if you love them for what they are, then let them be and let them go. They deserve our respect, or we might end up destroying the very people we meant to protect. Did you ever let a friend get drunk, or smoke, or drive a little too fast? Think of that next time your grandma insists on going for a stroll outdoors in a cold winter, or when your grandpa insists on mowing the grass.

ethics · euthanasia · merciful death

Updated charts up to March 18, 0am.
Please give some time (a minute or so) for the graphs to load, with over 18 thousand data points they are a bit heavy. While you wait you may also want to have a look into the data from Ibaraki.

The charts below, which shall loading as you read this, monitor the radiation levels in Hino, Tokyo (label H in the map below), located 244km (151miles) from Fukushima's Nuclear Power Plant (label F in the map below). The data was obtained from this webpage.



Radiation in μSv/h
This chart is simply a plot of the CPM readings from the Geiger counter transformed to μSv/h, assuming 120CPM ≈ 1μSv/h. Samples are being taken roughly every minute, since March 5th.



Accumulated radiation in μSv
This second chart shows the accumulated dose in μSv. This serves as a gross approximation of the accumulated μSv dose you would have been exposed to, if you were standing in the exact spot where the measurements were taken (presumably bare skin), and stayed there since March 5th.


If you assume the average rate of radiation keeps at this same pace, this is 1.2mSv/yr, about 83 times less than 100mSv/yr, which the smallest amount for which there is clear evidence of health impact.

No tags

Updated charts up to March 24, 11pm.

I've created this page as an attempt to help monitor and sort out all the confusion regarding the radiation levels and corresponding risks they impose on health. The data was obtained from here. Samples are being taken in three strategic locations: Kita Ibaraki, Takahagi City and Daigo Town. These locations stand right on the way from Fukushima to Tokyo. The Kita Ibaraki data is being sampled at the city hall (label B in the map below), 73.2km (45.5miles) from Fukushima's Nuclear Power Plant (label A in the map below). I am still not sure about the exact location for Takahagi City and Daigo Town, but I added their respective city halls in the map for reference, label C for Takahagi and D for Daigo. Label T is Tokyo, to give a sense of scale.



Before you try to understand and explore the graphs on the bottom of this page, please make sure you understand the following points:

• Hourly rates (e.g. μSv/h) and single doses (e.g. μSv) are different quantities, just like velocities (e.g. km/h) and distances (e.g. km), so please be careful. For instance if I say my car was at 150km/h it doesn't necessarily mean I actually travelled 150km. Similarly 0.08μSv/h will only be 0.08μSv after one hour have passed. Typically the high readings decayed very rapidly, in much less than one hour, as you will be able to see in the first chart below.
• In engineering the Greek symbol "μ" (as in "μSv"), reads "micro", and is commonly spelled with the letter "u" (historically Greek symbols were not readily available in typewriters and old text editors). The symbol "μ" has a simple role: it makes the decimal place of the preceding number loose 6 positions (in other words, divide by a million). So 100000μSv = 1Sv (you can imagine the confusion if you had to count all those zeros all the time). Note that this is very different from the symbol "m", read "mili", which we are much more familiar with, like in "mm" (milimeter) or "mL" (mililiter). The "m" makes the number loose only 3 positions (divide by one thousand), i.e. 1000mSv = 1Sv. Obviously this means 1000μSv = 1mSv, 100μSv = 0.1mSv and so on.
• We are always exposed to different sources of radiation even in the routine of our daily lives. For instance, eating a banana gives you approximately 0.1μSv, and a dental x-ray gives you about 5μSv.
• If you read about health risks you will typically find annual quantities (i.e. mSv/yr). For instance, the average person is exposed to about 3.6mSv/yr (=3600μSv/yr). As one accumulates larger doses health implications start to appear. As you can imagine, there is no "average person" -- everyone's is different so risks also vary greatly from person to person. Nonetheless, one frequently taken threshold is 100mSv/yr (=100000μSv/yr, or 0.1Sv/yr). This value of 100mSv/yr is assumed to be the lowest annual dose for which there is evidence of serious health implications (i.e. significative increase in the risk of cancer).

Ok, now to the charts. The first chart below is simply a plot of the measured μSv/h. Measurements are being taken every 10 minutes. The second chart shows the accumulated value in μSv. This serves as a gross approximation of the μSv dose you would get if you were standing in the exact spot where the measurements were taken (presumably bare skin), and stayed there since the beginning of the event on March 14, assuming the μSv/h rate remained constant every 10 minutes (if you are wondering, yes, I only sum 1/6th of the each measurement, since 1 hour = 6 x 10 minutes). Please remember this is all still speculation (albeit much more well grounded than some of the sensationalism we see the press). The goal is simply to put things into perspective by helping us get more acquainted to these strange quantities that we read in the news.

My final recommendation is: please be skeptical and check your sources (and this includes this post as well!). Even the official reports make mistakes some times.

Radiation in μSv/h


Accumulated radiation in μSv
If you assume the average rate of radiation keeps at the same pace of the last two days, this is 11.7mSv/yr for Kita Ibaraki, 18.8mSv/yr for Takahagi City and 1.4mSv/yr for Daigo Town. The smallest amount for which there is clear evidence of health impact 100mSv/yr.

I also offer the raw data compiled in an Excel sheet, Numbers sheet, and CSV, just in case someone else wants to use it. Note that a few missing datapoints were interpolated. The missing data for Daigo Town cannot be interpolated until they resume the measurements. For ground truth please refer to the original link.

You can also have a look at my radiation charts for Hino, Tokyo.

No tags

This is just another shot of Kiyomizu-dera that I had in my archive. Heavily post-processed to the point of looking like line drawing. I hope you enjoy.

architecture · Japan · Kiyomizu · Kyoto · Photo · Photography · temple · traditional · UNESCO

I asked myself: What sort of strategies are there for bloggers to draw people's attention to their new blogs? After doing no research whatsoever I came up with this top 10 list. I hope you find it useful.

1. Add a new article entitled "Top 10 tips to get people to your new blog".
2. Just write some babble to break the ice, before diving into the list itself.
3. Write down a nummered list just like this one.
4. Make
5. Sure
6. You
7. Have
8. Ten
9. Items
10. Post a link in social network websites, like Twitter and Facebook.

Does this work? You tell me!

Blog · Humor · Tips

Well, I tried to resist for too long... now I finally gave up... yes, I am starting my own blog.

first post