Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘adonis49

“I have to tell wife Anzi of my extermination mission…”

Note 1: The French author Jean-Claude Belfiore is from an Armenian mother and a Sicilian father. He had published “Hannibal: An unbelievable destiny“.

His second book that I reviewed in two parts was “I committed genocide on Armenians…” Diaries of a Turkish Captain.

He did his best to fool the reader that the book is a genuine diary from an actual Turkish officer.

The cover features an old picture of a Turkish officer, and throughout the book the author made sure to give the impression that the story was extracted from a diary, with attached clips of old Turkish dailies.

This style angered me and the author replied to my review.

Note 1: Sunni Kurds in the outback Turkey (195-18) were hired to do the ugly killing and ransacking of villages and guarding the prisoners.

Note 2: Here is the reply JeanClaude BELFIORE to my review.

New comment on your post “”I committed genocide on Armenians…” Diaries of a Turkish Captain. Part 1″
Author : JeanClaude BELFIORE (IP: 141.0.8.139 , s09-13.opera-mini.net)
E-mail : jc.belfiore@gmail.com
URL    : http://belfiore.fr/jeanclaude/
Whois  : http://whois.arin.net/rest/ip/141.0.8.139
Comment:

Merci pour cette mise au point. Dans la publication d’un livre,  il y a des contraintes éditoriales que, peut-être, vous ignorez et sur lesquelles il serait trop long de revenir.

Mais rappelez-vous une chose: un texte publié, quel qu’il soit (un journal?), est différent du texte qu’on garde chez soi dans un tiroir.

Encore une fois, le “journal” est un genre littéraire à part entière, comme le récit, comme le théâtre: il a ses lois – des lois qui sont différentes de celles du journal qu’on tient à la maison.

Il ne faut pas essayer de comparer les deux. Le premier n’est pas moins sincère que le second. – Et c’est parce que le massacre des Arméniens est sérieux que j’ai choisi un Turc pour le raconter.

Autre chose.
Je préfère la traduction “I killed Armenians” (part II) plutôt que “I committed genocide”, qui est anachronique. Le mot “genocide” est apparu en 1944.
Merci de l’intérêt que vous portez à ce livre.
JeanClaude Belfiore

Notes and comments on FB and Twitter. Part 21

I feel despondent: Nothing but the good came from mother (88 years), and they made sure to punish her by Not paying her visits, or have any patience to listen to her. She overcame all her pains and suffering to visit everyone of her relatives, whenever she could get a ride. She used to return home upset at the cruelty of those she visited.

And how the Boss can trick the others that he is consistent in his behaviors? If he fails to practice on the limitations that don’t match expectation or perception of the others?

How can the Boss satisfy the approbation of a cohort of conflicting idiosyncrasies?

It is exhausting to take on the role of the Boss. The key difficulty is to remain consistent in his set of attitudes, which he perceive or think that the other members perceive as “Boss’ Behaviors Requirements”

The proposed Boss, he better select a set of attitudes that match his natural upbringing, and keep practicing them to sustain his status (especially talent and fairness)

She is exclusively vegan. He is Not. She cooks for two. He cooks exclusively for himself. And occasionally go out single.

Helicobacter parasite neutralizes the gastric acid: take concentrated broccoli (sulforaphane)

East Aleppo must be liberated before Trump takes power

Congress/Senate pre-empted Trump take over by eliminating any excuse to renegotiate Iran Nuclear deal and antagonizing Europe: They extended for another 10 years the sanctions 

Obama cowed to Hillary’s pressures: sending 4,000 boots to Middle East. What for again? To make it harder on Trump’s rapprochement with Russia?

Les lois sur la “purete”des femmes sont apocryphes: ceux qui sont ecrites sont des interpretations mesquines et politiques

Jack London was the first ecologically minded person in running his farm (no fertilizers) and even his pigs were sheltered in stone houses (Pig Castle). He was the first who began producing long movies, 7 of them, before Hollywood existed.

If you want to transplant my brain, go ahead. Don’t blame me if you think your shitty brain is worse than mine.

In the last 15 years, I’m the only person who frequently patronized this library, to sit and read, and share what I read and review books. There is no appreciation of who should be treated as VIP

I have this strong impression that she opens the library when acquaintances or friends call her up for “sob7iyyeh wa dardasheh”.

I was eating a loaf of bread (baguette) while walking. A young woman approached me for money to buy milk. I asked her if she like to share some of my bread. She vehemently replied: No. No. Question: If you are Not willing to share my bread, why should I be incited to share the little cash I carry?

Frequent occurences: Homeless demands more cash than what you handed him. What? I didn’t read on a board hanging from his neck the minimum he is willing to accept

Crois-tu qu’on entretienne cette maisonée par magie? Non, Par des gens. Une communauté entiére

I’m reproducing what others have written, in my own style. Occasionally, I alter ideas, to transmit my reality 

Ce que les gens ne veulent pas se souvenir: la mortalité, un Coeur brisé, l’ignorance, la folie… Tout ce qui ne s’accroche pas aux mesures du temps

I have a few convictions not understood by people… Otherwise, I have none for my century…
POLITIQUE </p> <p>Je n'ai pas de convictions, comme l'entendent les gens de mon siècle, parce que je n'ai pas d'ambition.<br /> Il n'y a pas en moi de base pour une conviction.<br /> Il y a une certaine lâcheté ou plutôt une certaine mollesse chez les honnêtes gens.<br /> Les brigands seuls sont convaincus, - de quoi ? - qu'il leur faut réussir. Aussi, ils réussissent. Pourquoi réussirais-je, puisque je n'ai même pas envie d'essayer ?<br /> On peut fonder des empires glorieux sur le crime, et de nobles religions sur l'imposture.<br /> Cependant, j'ai quelques convictions, dans un sens plus élevé, et qui ne peut pas être compris par les gens de mon temps. </p> <p>Charles Baudelaire – Mon cœur mis à nu (Deuxième partie des journaux intimes) </p> <p>Charles Baudelaire, d'après Gustave Courbet ,1869
En POLITIQUE
Je n’ai pas de convictions, comme l’entendent les gens de mon siècle, parce que je n’ai pas d’ambition. Il n’y a pas en moi de base pour une conviction. Il y a une certaine lâcheté ou plutôt une certaine mollesse chez les honnêtes gens.
Les brigands seuls sont convaincus, – de quoi ? – qu’il leur faut réussir. Aussi, ils réussissent.
Pourquoi réussirais-je, puisque je n’ai même pas envie d’essayer ?
On peut fonder des empires glorieux sur le crime, et de nobles religions sur l’imposture.
Cependant, j’ai quelques convictions, dans un sens plus élevé, et qui ne peut pas être compris par les gens de mon temps. Charles Baudelaire
Mon cœur mis à nu (Deuxième partie des journaux intimes) Charles Baudelaire, d’après Gustave Courbet ,1869

Cynical minimalist illustrations: Do they reflect our times?

Eduardo Salles is a brilliant designer born in Mexico City in 1987. He is also an advertiser, designer, illustrator, writer and professor at the Miami Ad School.

As advertiser he won numerous awards, including the prestigious Cannes Lion. He runs a website called Cinismo Ilustrado, where he regularly publish clever and hilarious illustrations garnished with a tip of cynicism.

These pieces are wonderfully designed with a nice minimalistic style.
The illustrations featured in this post are the ones that caught our attention the most, as they are related to the times in which we live.

Make sure to take a look at Eduardo’s website if you’d like to see more of his clever artworks.

If you enjoyed this post, don’t be selfish, share it with your friends via Facebook or Twitter. Sharing is caring.

Life today

 

humorous-illustrations-3

 

Modern love

 

humorous-illustrations-1

 

2000′s cinderella

 

humorous-illustrations-7

 

Like me

 

humorous-illustrations-5

 

Inner child

 

humorous-illustrations-4

 

Freedom of speech

 

humorous-illustrations-6

 

Phone pride

 

humorous-illustrations-11

 

Icons that screw up our day

 

humorous-illustrations-14

 

Hopeless

 

humorous-illustrations-17

 

Life biggest disappointments

 

humorous-illustrations-16

 

Unequal

 

humorous-illustrations-18

 

Moon

 

humorous-illustrations-13

 

Stereotypes

 

humorous-illustrations-9

 

Credit card

 

humorous-illustrations-2

 

What music does to your brain

 

humorous-illustrations-12

(via)

Case for engineering our food?

I am a plant geneticist.

I study genes that make plants resistant to disease and tolerant of stress. In recent years, millions of people around the world have come to believe that there’s something sinister about genetic modification.

Today, I am going to provide a different perspective.

0:35 First, let me introduce my husband, Raoul. He’s an organic farmer. On his farm, he plants a variety of different crops.

This is one of the many ecological farming practices he uses to keep his farm healthy. Imagine some of the reactions we get: “Really? An organic farmer and a plant geneticist? Can you agree on anything?”

we can, and it’s not difficult, because we have the same goal. We want to help nourish the growing population without further destroying the environment. I believe this is the greatest challenge of our time.

genetic modification is not new; virtually everything we eat has been genetically modified in some manner.

Let me give you a few examples. On the left is an image of the ancient ancestor of modern corn. You see a single roll of grain that’s covered in a hard case. Unless you have a hammer, teosinte isn’t good for making tortillas.

Now, take a look at the ancient ancestor of banana. You can see the large seeds. And unappetizing brussel sprouts, and eggplant, so beautiful.

to create these varieties, breeders have used many different genetic techniques over the years. Some of them are quite creative, like mixing two different species together using a process called grafting to create this variety that’s half tomato and half potato.

Breeders have also used other types of genetic techniques, such as random mutagenesis, which induces uncharacterized mutations into the plants.

The rice in the cereal that many of us fed our babies was developed using this approach.

today, breeders have even more options to choose from. Some of them are extraordinarily precise.

I want to give you a couple examples from my own work.

I work on rice, which is a staple food for more than half the world’s people. Each year, 40% of the potential harvest is lost to pest and disease.

For this reason, farmers plant rice varieties that carry genes for resistance. This approach has been used for nearly 100 years. Yet, when I started graduate school, no one knew what these genes were.

It wasn’t until the 1990s that scientists finally uncovered the genetic basis of resistance. In my laboratory, we isolated a gene for immunity to a very serious bacterial disease in Asia and Africa. We found we could engineer the gene into a conventional rice variety that’s normally susceptible, and you can see the two leaves on the bottom here are highly resistant to infection.

the same month that my laboratory published our discovery on the rice immunity gene, my friend and colleague Dave Mackill stopped by my office. He said, “70 million rice farmers are having trouble growing rice.”

That’s because their fields are flooded, and these rice farmers are living on less than two dollars a day.

Although rice grows well in standing water, most rice varieties will die if they’re submerged for more than three days.

Flooding is expected to be increasingly problematic as the climate changes. He told me that his graduate student Kenong Xu and himself were studying an ancient variety of rice that had an amazing property. It could withstand two weeks of complete submergence. He asked if I would be willing to help them isolate this gene. I said yes — I was very excited, because I knew if we were successful, we could potentially help millions of farmers grow rice even when their fields were flooded.

Kenong spent 10 years looking for this gene. Then one day, he said, “Come look at this experiment. You’ve got to see it.” I went to the greenhouse and I saw that the conventional variety that was flooded for 18 days had died, but the rice variety that we had genetically engineered with a new gene we had discovered, called Sub1, was alive.

Kenong and I were amazed and excited that a single gene could have this dramatic effect. But this is just a greenhouse experiment. Would this work in the field?

I’m going to show you a four-month time lapse video taken at the International Rice Research Institute. Breeders there developed a rice variety carrying the Sub1 gene using another genetic technique called precision breeding.

On the left, you can see the Sub1 variety, and on the right is the conventional variety. Both varieties do very well at first, but then the field is flooded for 17 days. You can see the Sub1 variety does great. In fact, it produces three and a half times more grain than the conventional variety.

I love this video because it shows the power of plant genetics to help farmers. Last year, with the help of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, three and a half million farmers grew Sub1 rice.

many people don’t mind genetic modification when it comes to moving rice genes around, rice genes in rice plants, or even when it comes to mixing species together through grafting or random mutagenesis.

But when it comes to taking genes from viruses and bacteria and putting them into plants, a lot of people say, “Yuck.” Why would you do that? The reason is that sometimes it’s the cheapest, safest, and most effective technology for enhancing food security and advancing sustainable agriculture. I’m going to give you three examples.

First, take a look at papaya. It’s delicious, right? But now, look at this papaya. This papaya is infected with papaya ringspot virus.

In the 1950s, this virus nearly wiped out the entire production of papaya on the island of Oahu in Hawaii. Many people thought that the Hawaiian papaya was doomed, but then, a local Hawaiian, a plant pathologist named Dennis Gonsalves, decided to try to fight this disease using genetic engineering. He took a snippet of viral DNA and he inserted it into the papaya genome.

This is kind of like a human getting a vaccination. Now, take a look at his field trial. You can see the genetically engineered papaya in the center. It’s immune to infection. The conventional papaya around the outside is severely infected with the virus.

Dennis’ pioneering work is credited with rescuing the papaya industry. Today, 20 years later, there’s still no other method to control this disease. There’s no organic method. There’s no conventional method. 80% of Hawaiian papaya is genetically engineered.

some of you may still feel a little queasy about viral genes in your food, but consider this: The genetically engineered papaya carries just a trace amount of the virus. If you bite into an organic or conventional papaya that is infected with the virus, you will be chewing on tenfold more viral protein.

take a look at this pest feasting on an eggplant. The brown you see is frass, what comes out the back end of the insect. To control this serious pest, which can devastate the entire eggplant crop in Bangladesh, Bangladeshi farmers spray insecticides two to three times a week, sometimes twice a day, when pest pressure is high.

But we know that some insecticides are very harmful to human health, especially when farmers and their families cannot afford proper protection, like these children.

In less developed countries, it’s estimated that 300,000 people die every year because of insecticide misuse and exposure.

Cornell and Bangladeshi scientists decided to fight this disease using a genetic technique that builds on an organic farming approach. Organic farmers like my husband Raoul spray an insecticide called B.T., which is based on a bacteria.

This pesticide is very specific to caterpillar pests, and in fact, it’s nontoxic to humans, fish and birds. It’s less toxic than table salt. But this approach does not work well in Bangladesh. That’s because these insecticide sprays are difficult to find, they’re expensive, and they don’t prevent the insect from getting inside the plants.

In the genetic approach, scientists cut the gene out of the bacteria and insert it directly into the eggplant genome. Will this work to reduce insecticide sprays in Bangladesh? Definitely.

Last season, farmers reported they were able to reduce their insecticide use by a huge amount, almost down to zero. They’re able to harvest and replant for the next season.

I’ve given you a couple examples of how genetic engineering can be used to fight pests and disease and to reduce the amount of insecticides. My final example is an example where genetic engineering can be used to reduce malnutrition.

In less developed countries, 500,000 children go blind every year because of lack of Vitamin A. More than half will die. For this reason, scientists supported by the Rockefeller Foundation genetically engineered a golden rice to produce beta-carotene, which is the precursor of Vitamin A.

This is the same pigment that we find in carrots. Researchers estimate that just one cup of golden rice per day will save the lives of thousands of children.

But golden rice is virulently opposed by activists who are against genetic modification. Just last year, activists invaded and destroyed a field trial in the Philippines.

When I heard about the destruction, I wondered if they knew that they were destroying much more than a scientific research project, that they were destroying medicines that children desperately needed to save their sight and their lives.

Some of my friends and family still worry: How do you know genes in the food are safe to eat? I explained the genetic engineering, the process of moving genes between species, has been used for more than 40 years in wines, in medicine, in plants, in cheeses.

In all that time, there hasn’t been a single case of harm to human health or the environment. But I say, look, I’m not asking you to believe me. Science is not a belief system. (how people can easily discriminate science from pseudo science?)

My opinion doesn’t matter. Let’s look at the evidence.

After 20 years of careful study and rigorous peer review by thousands of independent scientists, every major scientific organization in the world has concluded that the crops currently on the market are safe to eat and that the process of genetic engineering is no more risky than older methods of genetic modification.

These are precisely the same organizations that most of us trust when it comes to other important scientific issues such as global climate change or the safety of vaccines.

Raoul and I believe that, instead of worrying about the genes in our food, we must focus on how we can help children grow up healthy.

We must ask if farmers in rural communities can thrive, and if everyone can afford the food.

We must try to minimize environmental degradation. What scares me most about the loud arguments and misinformation about plant genetics is that the poorest people who most need the technology may be denied access because of the vague fears and prejudices of those who have enough to eat.

We have a huge challenge in front of us. Let’s celebrate scientific innovation and use it. It’s our responsibility to do everything we can to help alleviate human suffering and safeguard the environment.  

14:19 Chris Anderson: Powerfully argued. The people who argue against GMOs, as I understand it, the core piece comes from two things.

One, complexity and unintended consequence. Nature is this incredibly complex machine. If we put out these brand new genes that we’ve created, that haven’t been challenged by years of evolution, and they started mixing up with the rest of what’s going on, couldn’t that trigger some kind of cataclysm or problem, especially when you add in the commercial incentive that some companies have to put them out there?

The fear is that those incentives mean that the decision is not made on purely scientific grounds, and even if it was, that there would be unintended consequences.

How do we know that there isn’t a big risk of some unintended consequence? Often our tinkerings with nature do lead to big, unintended consequences and chain reactions.

Pamela Ronald: Okay, so on the commercial aspects, one thing that’s really important to understand is that, in the developed world, farmers in the United States, almost all farmers, whether they’re organic or conventional, they buy seed produced by seed companies.

So there’s definitely a commercial interest to sell a lot of seed, but hopefully they’re selling seed that the farmers want to buy.

It’s different in the less developed world. Farmers there cannot afford the seed. These seeds are not being sold. These seeds are being distributed freely through traditional kinds of certification groups, so it is very important in less developed countries that the seed be freely available.

CA: Wouldn’t some activists say that this is actually part of the conspiracy? This is the heroin strategy. You seed the stuff, and people have no choice but to be hooked on these seeds forever?

PR: There are a lot of conspiracy theories for sure, but it doesn’t work that way. For example, the seed that’s being distributed, the flood-tolerant rice, this is distributed freely through Indian and Bangladeshi seed certification agencies, so there’s no commercial interest at all.

The golden rice was developed through support of the Rockefeller Foundation. Again, it’s being freely distributed. There are no commercial profits in this situation.

And now to address your other question about, well, mixing genes, aren’t there some unintended consequences? Absolutely — every time we do something different, there’s an unintended consequence, but one of the points I was trying to make is that we’ve been doing kind of crazy things to our plants, mutagenesis using radiation or chemical mutagenesis.

This induces thousands of uncharacterized mutations, and this is even a higher risk of unintended consequence than many of the modern methods.

And so it’s really important not to use the term GMO because it’s scientifically meaningless. I feel it’s very important to talk about a specific crop and a specific product, and think about the needs of the consumer.

CA: So part of what’s happening here is that there’s a mental model in a lot of people that nature is nature, and it’s pure and pristine, and to tinker with it is Frankensteinian.

It’s making something that’s pure dangerous in some way, and I think you’re saying that that whole model just misunderstands how nature is. Nature is a much more chaotic interplay of genetic changes that have been happening all the time anyway.

PR: That’s absolutely true, and there’s no such thing as pure food. I mean, you could not spray eggplant with insecticides or not genetically engineer it, but then you’d be stuck eating frass. So there’s no purity there.

Note: In Africa Burkina Fasso, Monsanto is monopolizing vast lands for genetically modified crops and Not distributing  any of its seed to local farmers

Patsy Z  shared this link

One of my favorite TED talks this year: Pamela Ronald makes a strong case for engineering food: http://b-gat.es/1zYWICq

Pamela Ronald studies the genes that make plants more resistant to disease and stress.
In an eye-opening talk, she describes her decade-long quest…
b-gat.es|By Pamela Ronald

How can you put the ‘awe’ back in ‘awesome’?

Webster’s dictionary defines the word “awesome” as fear mingled with admiration or reverence, a feeling produced by something majestic.

How many times have you used the word “awesome” today? Once? Twice? 77 times?

Do you remember what you were describing when you used the word? No, I didn’t think so, because it’s come down to this: You’re using the word incorrectly, and tonight I hope to show you how to put the “awe” back in “awesome.”

0:32 Recently, I was dining at an outdoor cafe, and the server came up to our table, and asked us if we had dined there before, and I said, “Yes, yes, we have.” And she said, “Awesome.” And I thought, “Really? Awesome or just merely good that we decided to visit your restaurant again?”

The other day, one of my coworkers asked me if I could save that file as a PDF, and I said, “Well, of course,” and he said, “Awesome.” Seriously, can saving anything as a PDF be awesome?

the frequent overuse of the word “awesome” has now replaced words like “great” and “thank you.”

Webster’s dictionary defines the word “awesome” as fear mingled with admiration or reverence, a feeling produced by something majestic.

with that in mind, was your Quiznos sandwich awesome? How about that parking space? Was that awesome? Or that game the other day? Was that awesome? The answer is no, no and no.

A sandwich can be delicious, that parking space can be nearby, and that game can be a blowout, but not everything can be awesome. (Laughter)

when you use the word “awesome” to describe the most mundane of things, you’re taking away the very power of the word. This author says, “Snowy days or finding money in your pants is awesome.” (Laughter) Um, no, it is not, and we need to raise the bar for this poor schmuck. (Laughter)

if you have everything, you value nothing.

It’s a lot like drinking from a firehose like this jackass right here. There’s no dynamic, there’s no highs or lows, if everything is awesome.

Ladies and gentlemen, here are 10 things that are truly awesome.

Imagine, if you will, having to schlep everything on your back. Wouldn’t this be easier for me if I could roll this home? Yes, so I think I’ll invent the wheel. The wheel, ladies and gentlemen. Is the wheel awesome? Say it with me. Yes, the wheel is awesome!

The Great Pyramids were the tallest man-made structure in the world for 4,000 years. Pharaoh had his slaves move millions of blocks just to this site to erect a big freaking headstone. Were the Great Pyramids awesome? Yes, the pyramids were awesome.

The Grand Canyon. Come on. It’s almost 80 million years old. Is the Grand Canyon awesome? Yes, the Grand Canyon is. (No, Not man-made)

Louis Daguerre invented photography in 1829, and earlier today, when you whipped out your smartphone and you took a shot of your awesome sandwich, and you know who you are — (Laughter) — wasn’t that easier than exposing the image to copper plates coated with iodized silver? I mean, come on. Is photography awesome? Yes, photography is awesome.

D-Day, June 6, 1944, the Allied invasion of Normandy, the largest amphibious invasion in world history. Was D-Day awesome? Yes, it was awesome. (Hopefully you won’t add dropping the A-bomb?)

Did you eat food today? Did you eat? Then you can thank the honeybee, that’s the one, because if crops aren’t pollinated, we can’t grow food, and then we’re all going to die. It’s just like that. But it’s not like a flower can just get up and have sex with another flower, although that would be awesome. (Laughter) Bees are awesome. Are you kidding me?

Landing on the moon! Come on! Apollo 11. Are you kidding me? Sixty-six years after the Wright Brothers took off from Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, Neil Armstrong was 240,000 miles away. That’s like from here to the moon. (Laughter) That’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for awesome! You’re damn right, it was. (And robbed us of whatever love dreams we had?)

Woodstock, 1969: Rolling Stone Magazine said this changed the history of rock and roll. Tickets were only 24 dollars back then. You can’t even buy a freaking t-shirt for that now. Jimi Hendrix’s version of “The Star-Spangled Banner” was the most iconic. Was Woodstock awesome? Yes, it was awesome.

Sharks! They’re at the top of the food chain. Sharks have multiple rows of teeth that grow in their jaw and they move forward like a conveyor belt. Some sharks can lose 30,000 teeth in their lifetime. Does awesome inspire fear? Oh, hell yeah, sharks are awesome!

The Internet was born in 1982 and it instantly took over global communication, and later tonight, when all these PowerPoints are uplifted to the Internet so that a guy in Siberia can get drunk and watch this crap, the Internet is awesome.

And finally, some of you can’t wait to come up and tell me how awesome my PowerPoint was. I will save you the time. It was not awesome, but it was true, and I hope it was entertaining, and out of all the audiences I’ve ever had, y’all are the most recent. Thank you and good night.

 

Patsy Z  shared this link

10 things that are way more awesome than your sandwich:

Comedian Jill Shargaa sounds a hilarious call for us to save the word “awesome” for things that truly inspire awe.
t.ted.com|By Jill Shargaa

 

The thing you can’t have becomes a powerful placebo

New MQA music format?

The efficacy of a technology, a shortcut, a medicine, a tool, a method—you get the idea—is directly related to how difficult it is to obtain.

Placebos work because our brain picks up where our belief begins.

Without some sort of conscious or subconscious trigger, the placebo effect never kicks in.

But when it does, it’s astonishingly effective. Placebos change performance, cure diseases and make food taste better.

Consider the case of the new music format, MQA.

The overdue successor to the MP3 files we’ve been listening to for a decade or more, MQA treats your music with more care, and the reports are it sounds better. A lot better.

Of course, most people can’t hear the difference in a double-blind test, particularly with disposable earbuds.

But that’s okay, because no one is double blind in real life. Instead, we have information about what we’re listening to and where it came from, and it turns out that knowing the provenance of your music can actually make it sound better.

The fact that MQA might actually sound better is a fine thing, but the lesson here is about the story.

The MQA rollout has been agonizingly slow, with dates promised and then missed, with absent bits of gear, with no easy way to get this new technology. Which makes it even better, of course.

The same is true for baked goods that sell out every morning at 8 am, and the new beta-version of an app that makes you more productive.

If you want your medicine to be more effective, consider making it difficult to get.

[PS I’ll be doing a Facebook Live Q&A about the altMBA. See you at 2 pm ET today, Thursday.]


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

March 2017
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 920,858 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 461 other followers

%d bloggers like this: