Reference: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/salary-caps-would-cripple-canadas-charities/article1694263/

However, Mr. Pallotta’s background is not told to the reader, other than that he is the author of Uncharitable. No information about the book itself is given either.

Let me fill in the missing information:

In his groundbreaking new book, Uncharitable: How Restraints on Nonprofits Undermine Their Potential , Pallotta makes the case that the nonprofit sector needs to be deregulated so that it can directly harness the energy of capitalism and the profit motive in pursuit of philanthropy.

Reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcYBCB5dAuc

This is Pallotta’s cause du jour. This needs to be relayed to the reader so they can adequately judge who is doing the writing.

Now, his editorial has some flaws of logic. He is assuming, as many do, that increasing monetary rewards increases motivation, effort, and quality. This is wrong. Study after study has shown some simple facts: money only improves the speed of rote physical tasks. Anything that involves creative thinking, processing, or problem solving, monetary rewards actually make people slower. It also the quality of the output as well. Further studies showed that when you pay people just enough to take money worries off of the table, people work for intrinsic benefits. They want a sense of challenge in their work. They want to impress their peers. They want purpose and interesting challenges.

Pallotta needs to take a look at this research, and see how he can use it in charities. Pay the employees, not just the executives, enough that they don’t have to worry about money. Give them challenging problems. Let them impress their peers. Let them take ownership of the problem, rather than following the dictates of a CEO that is paid 100x more than they are.

Thats another part of the research that shocked people, especially researchers at Harvard. When someone is paid comfortably, and then they see someone being paid more, for what seems like the same work, then money worries become an issue again, and block effort and motivation.

Instead of placing a direct cap on CEO compensation, what should instead be done is to limit pay to a flat multiple of the lowest-paid full-time employee. Say 10x? That means janitors, which make an average of $30,000 a year, would set the limit at $300,000 for the executives. This motivates the CEO to pay his employees better. But due to the number of employees, no board will let the CEO give massive payraises to everyone. The employees, which do all the actual work Mr. Pallotta, are now free to stop worrying about money, and do the best job on their job, while the CEO is paid less.

There is also the fact that Pallotta seems to feel that restricting restricts the quality of the leadership. There is no empirical evidence this is true. For the last 10 years, Harvard economists have not found any link between executive pay, and corporate performance. If anything, there is a slight reverse correlation, where the higher the pay, the worse the companies do.

Mr. Pallotta, look into compensation, rewards and motivations, and pay. You may get some better ideas on how to make charities run better, than spending millions on a CEO. Spending more doesn’t help Wall Street companies, so how will it help charities?

A bit of background first. Quebecor applied for a rare “must-carry” license, a Class 1 License, for a specialty all-news channel, Sun TV News, which would make all the cable and satellite providers provide this channel to all customers. Such a license would be massively profitable for Quebecor.

The CRTC denied the license request, stating that there was little to differentiate Sun TV News from its all-news competitors.

Quebecor has confirmed that the proposed Sun TV News channel would have a “straight-talk, conservative” bent to it, allegedly to offer more varied viewpoints in the Canadian media landscape.

There are some serious issues surrounding Sun TV News and the involvement of the current government. Stephen Harper’s former Head of Communications, Kory Teneycke will be Sun TV News’ chief executive. Stephen Harper has also had lunches with the head of Fox News, Rupert Murdoch. He has never had a lunch or meeting with the owners or executives from CNN, MSNBC, or any other media organization.

Stephen Harper has also been on record for enjoying the kind of news Fox News provides the United States of America.

Bringing these facts together, Lawrence Martin, backed up by unnamed sources, speculated Harper may remove Finklestein from power to ensure Sun TV News gets its unprecedented Class 1 License.

This in turn spurred the activist organization Avaaz.org, to setup an online petition asking Harper to not remove Finklestein from of his job. Avaaz.org stated in the petition,

“Prime Minister Harper is pressuring the Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission to approve plans for a ‘Fox News North’. If successful, this would bring American-style hate media to Canadian airwaves, and be funded by our license fees!”

While they are correct about the license fees, which every Canadian Taxpayer pays as part of our taxes, the conclusions that Sun TV News will be “hate media” are merely rumors so far, spurred by Lawrence Martin’s column.

However, several news organizations saw fit to print the exact same attack piece, “Anti-Sun TV campaign in US”, criticizing avaaz.org. The organizations that have printed the attack piece are: canoe.ca, The Toronto Sun, London Free Press, The Ottawa Sun, and The Edmonton Sun. All of these media organizations are owned by Quebecor, the same company that stands to make millions if the Class 1 License is approved.

The piece uses language like, “A far left-wing American lobby group funded by U.S. billionaire George Soros wants you to be scared, very scared. There might soon be more competition in the world of TV news.” and “What this petition is about is a group of left-wing Americans supporting interests in Canada that don’t want to see competition in news broadcasting.”

The piece notes that “Part of the campaign to stop SUN TV News Channel from launching focuses on the idea that Canadians could be forced to pay for this venture. Author Margaret Atwood took to Twitter to denounce this.” Upon examining Margaret Atwood’s twitter stream, there is no evidence that she has denounced this claim, or the petition. In fact, she tweeted this: “Free speech does not mean under-the-carpet deals that would force people to pay for Fox out of cable fees.” at 6:51 PM PST Aug 31st.

The attack piece was written by Brian Lilley. He works for Quebecor Media International, which is the owner of the not-yet-approved Sun TV News channel, as a Senior Correspondent.

Since I wrote most of the above, there has been some further information to add to the story. Apparently parties unknown signed up Andrew Coyne(Editor in chief of Macleans), Paul Wells(Correspondent, Macleans), Kady O’Malley(CBC), Stephen Wickery(The Globe and Mail) on Avaaz without their permission. This spurred avaaz.org to post the following apology:
(Except)

Yesterday Avaaz experienced an attack on our “Stop ‘Fox News North’” petition consisting of fraudulent sign-ups of targeted individuals.

There is evidence of a deliberate and illegal effort designed to discredit Avaaz and violate an important form of democratic expression for Canadian citizens. If this is confirmed we will request a full investigation, and help to bring the perpetrators to justice.

It seems likely that the people behind this attack wanted the public to think that Avaaz is a spamming organization. They targeted key journalists in an effort to damage Avaaz’s reputation in the press.

It remains to be seen who(whether singular or in collusion) did this action, or what the intentions were. avaaz.org has no obligation to be fair and balanced in its reporting of facts, unlike the media organizations that run the attack piece.

It should also be pointed out that avaaz.org is campaigning against the use of Canadian tax dollars to fund what many fear will be a “Fox News North”. This reporter has no objection to a Fox News North, as long as it is not paid for with Canadian tax dollars. The attack piece by Brian Lilley says that Sun TV News never asked for Canadian tax dollars, ignoring the fact that they did implicitly ask for them with their request for a Class 1 License.

This works well with an action-unlock system, where investing in skill trees unlock new actions to use. It also allows the player to choose to take the trade-off, of the big action, whether to save themselves, or to finish the fight, while simultaneously not overly punishing them for choosing to do so. That is the issue with mana-based magic systems coupled with no-cost physical actions. It made players conserve their mana until the dungeon boss. Meanwhile, this system allows for players to balance the choice and risk, without a major long-lasting cost.

I would like to have somethings that could only be used once every five rounds or so, maybe, like 4e’s daily attacks.

What do you think?

First: “look” of the game. After a lot of wrangling and debate, I’ve decided on 2d top-down view. This requires some simplification of some of the combat mechanics. Instead of damage per “part”, there will be damage per facing, then core health. I’m debating hex-tiles or square-tiles at the moment.

Other things I’m considering, are energy mechanics, and physical action mechanics. My current ideas are pretty specious at the moment. I’m considering energy flow to individual items, and some items when used or triggered increase their draw on the circuit(like a load current from a motor). You could also redirect some energy from one part to another as needed, but this takes time(affected by skills and items).

Then for physical action, I’m considering maybe a system similar to Champions Online. That would be a morale meter, where you do actions, then, depending on stuff, the morale meter increases, allowing you to do more complex and expensive stuff.

Another possibility is to adapt the D&D 4e system of at-wills, encounter, daily abilities. I actually kind of like that system.

Yet another possibility is a stamina meter, which acts kind of like a capacitor, that gets drained by actions, then charges up over time.

What do you think?

So I’m designing and making a game. The design is the important part I feel. Can I take an idea from conception, figure out all the important details, write up a proper design document, and then, follow it?

So here are the basics of the game design so far.

It will likely be a 2d Mecha game, fantasy-environment. Each mecha will have an energy budget, to supply items, armor, and weapons. In addition, mecha frames will have base stats like mobility, etc, modified by the pilot’s skills. The energy budget is provided by power-cores. There are four “kinds” of energy, white, black, red, and blue. There is no “rock-paper-scissors” advantage provided by any one kind of energy, simply that different effects belong to each kind.

I’m still working this out, for the moment. But basically it goes like so: white: slowly increasing damage strength, effects from only matched sets, and repel effects; black: defensive powers, draining, bonuses for only using black stuff; red: deflecting attacks, random disabling of enemy items, and various miscellanous effects; blue: pulses, knockback effects, manipulate power flow.

I decided to keep to within the remit of that stuff, both to limit what I have to decide on, and because this is fairly easy to balance. Each type has some sort of unique schtick, some way of reducing damage, and something that can make good combos with other kinds of energy.

Mechas will have “slots” to put parts of armor on, weapons, and items, which are stuff that would be like amulets or something that provides an additional unique benefit or effect.

The gameplay will be tactical and positional. You have to try to target the damaged parts of the enemy mecha, while defending your own from attack. If your core gets damaged enough, your whole mecha shuts down.

I am currently considering the skill and stat system. I’m thinking of doing a “cap-and-trade-off” system. There will be a max number of skill points you can spend(the cap), while opposite skills(say speed training vs strength training) will have negative effects on each other(and the trade-off). Ie, if you start to bulk up, that affects your mobility. The more you bulk up, the slower you become.

In addition, there will be the normal range of fantasy-type weapons for the mechas to wield, from long swords to long bows, all appropriately giant-sized. You can train in using these as well, and switch between weapons during combat.

So what do you think so far?

I’ve observed something interesting though. Cryptic has been really stepping up their communication, thanks to people like Rehpic, Falkoren, and Jaguars. This has served to really benefit the game without much of a cost to the company.

Here’s a hypothetical. Say someone asks some questions about personal shields. Falkoren then asks the powers designers how they work, and he tells us in #stoqa. This gives us the knowledge to properly test them, while some of us add this info to places like sto-intel.org

This then serves to enhance the game. Players have more knowledge, players can properly test complex things to ensure they’re working right. For a minimal cost, of a few minutes of discussion between employees and customers, you have tremendously added to the perceived value of the game.

Encouraging communities are an excellent investment for game companies. Supporting them with actual employee interaction and communication is just pure gold.

However, Cryptic isn’t perfect in their communication. For example, the other moderators have a set of new rules they want to add and enforce for the IRC channels, however, its been difficult reaching Rekhan or Phoxe to get approval. In addition, they don’t rarely come in to the IRC channels for us to communicate community issues there are. I am thankful for Wishstone, she has been a good communication pipeline to Cryptic, but she’s the OCR for the German community, not the english community! This needs to change.

Dr. Chau recently made a significant advancement in the field of nanotechnology, where he demonstrated that light could actually pull a nano-scale object, rather than just push. The implications are very important, both for the field, and eventually for the production of military, scientific, and consumer products.

The kind of materials that Dr. Chau and others in his field work with, named ‘metamaterials’, offer many benefits to military, scientific, and consumer fields. For the military, such materials and devices can create new metal alloys, with potential unique properties, like extreme heat resistance or superior strength. On top of that, metamaterials offer the possibilities of perfect lenses, or perfectly reflective mirrors. In the more futuristic list of possibilities, it is believed that this field of nanotechnology will eventually allow us to build an invisibility cloak, or even optical computers, but both such inventions are far from being created.

All objects can be characterized by a refractive index, or an index of refraction as it is also called. This is the degree to which light is slowed down within the medium. As well, when light crosses the boundary between two mediums with different refractive indexes, light bends. Microscopes and lenses work by bending light in useful ways. All natural mediums have a positive refractive index, meaning that light is slowed down within the medium. However, some metamaterials have a property known as a negative refractive index, where light is bent in the opposite direction than in materials with a positive refractive index.

This is where the radiation pressure of light comes into play. Light has momentum, like any object that is in motion. However, light has a very small momentum, and can only affect small particles. The radiation pressure effect of light is why comets’ tails are always pointed away from the sun; the charged particles are pushed away by the radiation pressure of light. Picture a fire hose being pointed at you. The pressure of the hose pushes you away.

When the radiation pressure of light is combined with a negative index of refraction, Dr. Chau, proved, via experiment, that light can actually exert a pull force, in addition to pushing around particles. It is like some method of making the fire hose pull you, instead of pushing you away. If researchers can construct objects with arbitrary optical properties, then they can manipulate light in arbitrary ways, leading to all of the innovations listed previously, and many more not imagined yet. We have things, previously thought to be only in the realm of science fiction, happening in labs every day, around the world, and even on our campus.

Currently, the Chau Research group Dr. Chau is working on several exciting projects, and require talented and capable students with diverse backgrounds. One project Dr. Chau is involved in is the construction of a computer cluster, also known as a supercomputer, for simulating complex physical phenomenon. Another is a project to build a sensor, capable of detecting contaminants in water, by using spectroscopic analysis of light that comes out of properly formed droplets of water. One possible use for this optical sensor is to detect vanishingly small amounts of impurities in water.

On Tuesday, September 22nd, Microsoft released details about a product now in “late development”, the Microsoft Courier. Microsoft calls it a “booklet”, rather than a “tablet”, due to the two touchscreens the Courier offers, with a bendable spine. The Courier also comes with a camera on the back of one half of the booklet, as well as a single Apple-like Home button in the spine, which is used for powering the device on and off as well.

The Courier will be a full-featured computer, running a specialized GUI meant specifically for the Courier. It will have wireless and Microsoft’s famed handwriting recognition, however, there is no indication of USB ports or other items. The killer feature though is the handwriting recognition, which in XP, Vista, and now Windows 7, is beyond fantastic.

There is a video circulating which shows a fantastic, and well-thought out GUI, which is focused on productivity and Getting Stuff Done, rather than the cool, slick, media-focused iPhone and iPod Touch. With the two screens, the handwriting recognition, and the the integration with the OS, the Courier looks like an ideal tool for executives, creative professionals, and students.

Microsoft has not yet detailed what the specs of the Courier will be, and there is no word on battery life.

There is speculation that this is part of a business move to lower sales and interest in Apple’s rumored iTablet. However, the promotional material and the design of the Courier is very distinctive and unique, and seems to be trying to carve a new niche for Microsoft, in the world of the Professional.

The only downside to the Courier, is that it is not out yet, and not before this editor graduates.

Part of the reason why the Japanese are so fascinated, and even encouraging of robots and androids, is that for the longest time, Japanese and other Asian fiction lacked a common trope that is often seen here in the west; that of the robots rising to crush their so-easily-crushed oppressors. Namely, us. It wasn’t until recently that this trope was seen in Japanese popular culture, and an excellent example is Cashern, a hyper-surreal action movie, where artificial life rises up and kills us all.

Some sociologists theorize that Japan lacks this common trope because industrialization was seen as largely positive for the country, particularly in the aftermath of WWII. In contrast, there was a large amount of social upheaval in western countries during their industrialization periods, where the machines were seen as a distinct threat.

On average, Japan has one of the oldest populations in the industrialized world. In just a few short years, many Japanese will reach the age of 65, and retire, making it so that 1 in every 4 Japanese will be over the age of 65. This is leading to a significant lack of employees, in turn leading to increasing wage costs for companies.

There are two major markets for robots and androids in Japan, one for the elderly, and one for replacing limited employees where possible. The elderly market requires assistants and companions, especially for the elderly that have no family, or whose family doesn’t visit them. There are already a few preliminary models of elderly assistants, and they are selling very, very well. The other market requires robots to replace humans in easy-to-automate jobs, like store greeters, or waitresses in busy restaurants. One particular requirement is that they look and act as human as possible within the limited purview of the job.

The increasing use of robots and androids in Japan has already sparked several major concerns with their use. There are worries that people will begin to prefer talking to and dealing with robots and androids over their human brethren. As well, there are concerns about the material costs of robots and androids, especially maintenance costs, and whether it really would be more cost-effective than the humans that are being replaced. In addition, Japan has signed several environmental treaties, and increasing their high-tech usage will only hurt their compliance with these treaties.

There is also an issue from an economic viewpoint. The desire to replace humans with robots is because the humans are becoming more expensive to employ. This increases the number of people available for jobs, thus driving down the average wage, making it cheaper to hire people again. However, once hiring increases, then people become more expensive to employ again. It is an inherently unstable situation, unless the government steps in to stabilize the see-saw effect.

One thing is for sure, Japan loves their robots, and they are currently the world leader in practical robotics.

What super-positioning means is when something is in two or more states at the same time. The classic analogy is known as the Schroedinger cat experiment. This is a thought-experiment(meaning its never been performed in real life, but only in the mind) where a cat is placed in a box, where a poison will be released only if a radioactive object decays within the time period inside the box. The decay probability is 50%, so the cat has a 50% chance of being alive, and an equal chance of being dead. The trick, however, is that until observed, the cat is in both states, as in, the cat is both dead and alive. The cat is in a superposition, two states at once.

This is intuitively difficult for many people, including physicists. When the cat is observed, the cat becomes either dead or alive, but not both. This is called collapsing the wave function, where observation of some form(even by a sensor) causes the superposition to resolve to one state or another.

What the researchers want to do is to cool some matter, namely a virus, down to its quantum ground state in a vacuum, until there is no subatomic activity from the virus. Then they zap the virus with a special kind of laser, which causes the virus to both be in an excited state, and a ground state, at the same time; a superposition. Having performed this same experiment with photons, electrons, and even whole molecules, they wish to see if they can make a much larger bit of matter reach a superposition. This will help show if such quantum mechanical effects apply on the macroscopic(large) scale, instead of just the microscopic scale.

The virus they need to use for the experiment needs to have several special qualities, and luckily(for our karmic revenge) the common flu virus fits this bill. In addition the tobacco mosaic virus would also be perfect for the experiment.