humor

By February 2009, all over-the-air television broadcasts in the United States will be digital.  There are good reasons for the switch such as better use of bandwidth.  However, people who still use rabbit ear antennas for TV reception will need a new digital converter box which is not a simple undertaking.  While this video is obviously tongue-in-cheek, the switch-over will not be easy for many.  As the video illustrates, it is not clear how to get an antenna, and afterward, how to install it.

{ 1 comment }

I’m at the airport waiting to board a flight.  Here is a funny warning message that greeted me on the parking garage ticket-dispensing machine:

{ 0 comments }

Here are some interesting videos about game testing at the user experience firm bolt|peters.  The first is an overview of user testing games and the second video is some humorous test sessions of the game Spore.  Really fascinating stuff.  Note the extensive use of think aloud

Science of Fun from bolt peters on Vimeo.

Spore Research: Outtakes from bolt peters on Vimeo.

{ 3 comments }

I snapped this picture near NCSU today. Looks like the garbage workers or apartment dwellers decided to take matters into their own hands.

{ 1 comment }

You may have heard the news of the new Google web browser and while I do not have deep thoughts about it yet I found the following interface element humorous. One of its lauded features is the ability to surf without leaving “tracks” (e.g., cookies).  When you are in that mode (incognito mode) you see the following creepy guy staring at you:

{ 0 comments }

Like many people, I use heuristics when choosing between food products. My algorithm goes something like this:

1. What’s the lowest unit price? 25 cents per ounce vs. 40 cents per ounce?
2. Pick up the lowest
3. Look at the saturated fat RDI
4. If reasonable, look at ingredients
5. Is list too long to read in 3 seconds?
6. If yes, pick up next cheapest item for comparison.
7. If no, look for “partially hydrogonated” or “high fructose corn syrup”
8. If either found, pick up next cheapest item for comparison
9. If neither found, purchase.

Wouldn’t it be great if someone did steps 3-9 for me? Or if they considered factors I’m too lazy or uneducated enough to balance and comprehend? Well, the ONQI has stepped up to the challenge. The ONQI, or Overall Nutritional Quality Index, is coming to products near you as a single scale for all foods. As the site states, it finally allows the comparison of apples to oranges (oranges win, by the way.)
One of the things I’m most impressed with is the ONQI’s use of the entire scale. Unlike choosing wine by points (where nearly every advertised bottle is above 88 points on a 100 scale), on the ONQI soda gets a 1 while oranges get 100. Now we know that although pretzels aren’t bad for you… they certainly aren’t good for you with a rating of eleven. Eleven is a lot closer to Coca-cola than it is to oranges.

The second thing I’m impressed with is their attempt at transparency. Their conference presentations are available online. However, due to patent, the actual algorithm used is not available. We are asked to trust that experts have tested it and found it reliable. Hopefully this will change as soon as the patent expires and it may be examined by numerous independent investigators.

One thing it does not do (that the food pyramid has been trying to do for 50 years) is recommend a balanced diet. Oranges and strawberries may score 100s, but a pure diet of those won’t do much but prevent rickets. However, I like their concept of attacking the nutrition problem at a food-by-food level. If I have my meal basically planned, I can use the scale to decide between individual options.

Last, I enjoyed this bit from their website:

What about products that don’t score well? Aren’t you at risk of alienating some brands? The ONQI was developed based on sound science, independent of any food company or commodity organization bias. Since the ONQI can be applied to all foods, beverages, recipes and meals, it levels the playing field, and provides consumers with a universal tool to measure any food they wish to purchase. It can also provide a benchmark for product development and reformulation.

The failed food pyramid is a good example of how difficult it is to create a nationwide understanding of a complex topic. The ONQI does the work for the consumer; work we’re clearly not interested in doing ourselves. I’m going to be watching closely to see how the ONQI pans out in studies of purchasing behavior changes.

{ 1 comment }