Impossibland

by Ryan Zielonka on June 6, 2010

I love to visit bookstores, though on occasion I feel guilty for spending so much money inside them. I can hear my mother now, telling me I could find these titles for half price used on Amazon or eBay. But there’s an impalpable seductive quality to new books, the pages unruffled and pure that keeps me coming back. I think it could also be the coffee.

I’ve of late been putting an inordinate amount of time into philosophical texts. My current literary victim is Nassim Nicholas Taleb and his book, The Black Swan. The Wall Street Journal noted that “he writes in a style that owes as much to Stephen Colbert as it does to Michel de Montaigne.” I would have to agree.

Taleb’s black swan is in academia also referred to as a fat tail, and is the outlier that reintroduces luck and serendipity into the social sciences. Taleb seeks to explain the high impact, “impossible” events that defy our expectations of the material world and so take on the garb of a Power Law distribution. He as well examines humanity’s psychological bias and blindness toward such rare events, and in doing so seeks to answer why we’re so susceptible and blind to them.

Broadly the cognitive bias and, more specifically, the confirmation bias prove problematic as we try to understand the world we live in. By means of naïve empiricism we bipedal thinking things have a tendency to look for instances that confirm the narratives and stories and Platonic understandings of our world. The problem of course is that if you look for confirmation you can find it almost anywhere. Taleb argues that instead of deluding ourselves into thinking we’ve just aroused evidence for our correctness, we should rather scrape and claw and unearth those instances where our method or theory or course of action fails. It’s at that juncture that we actually learn something.

I’m going to try something different this time around and throw the question out to you, my readers. When have you found yourself susceptible to confirmation bias? Or, when you have taken the empiricist’s path and avoided the confirmation bias, and sought to falsify your theory rather than confirm it?

{ 2 comments }

What Air Combat Can Teach Us

by Ryan Zielonka on May 30, 2010

I just finished reading Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War, a biography by Robert Coram. It’s a fantastic book, appealing in depth, in complexity, and in its treatment of Colonel John Boyd, one of the finest unsung heroes of contemporary military science.

In the truest sense of the word, John Boyd was a genius. Taking just a brief tour of his accomplishments, we discover he wrote the manual on air-to-air combat. Before Boyd, dog-fighting was seen as some interpretative art–like ice dancing–and beyond the realm of science.

Boyd served as an instructor at the Air Force’s Fighter Weapons School (the nomenclature and design were later copied by the Navy, hence “Top Gun,” however Boyd’s Air Force institution was the original and the real deal). At age 33, he wrote a booklet on air superiority titled “Aerial  Attack Study.” It was so revolutionary that, since the time of its release, no further advances have been made in aerial combat strategy. Boyd’s booklet was the first and last word on tactical piloting and weapons use.

Boyd later developed the Energy-Maneuverability Theory. The E-M Theory gave fighter pilots for the first time a rubric to determine the energy potential of any given maneuver at any altitude for any aircraft, whether it be their own or their enemies. Before the acceptance of Boyd’s E-M Theory, fighter jets were designed to fly fast in a straight line or fly high. The F-15 was the first to be developed with maneuverability in mind. Boyd played a critical role in its construction and design.

Later Boyd and the “Fighter Mafia,” as they were dubbed, became the most influential ad hoc group the Pentagon had ever known, and in time fathered the F-16 and the F-18. Boyd’s later works like Patterns of Conflict and The Observation-Orientation-Decision-Action Loop helped form the bedrock of the Defense Reform Movement and led to much of the strategy behind the first Gulf War.

We on occasion run into similar quandaries in our daily lives as a fighter pilot does in the sky. At times the stakes can be just as serious. So what of it? How could a fighter pilot trying to jockey a $20 million aircraft apply to such mundane matters as politics?

First, it’s important to recognize that we are all complicit in politics, whether it be the public governance type or just what happens in our family lives. Politics has come to be used as a pejorative and that proves unfortunate. If you head to Definr, my favorite online dictionary,  and search for politics, the first definition you’ll come up against is this:

politics (http://definr.com/politics)

n 1: social relations involving authority or power [syn: {political
relation}]

Read that one carefully. First, “social relations.” By design, humans are social creatures. There are macro-sociological arguments abound that titrate from our inherently social nature our improved chances for survival and hence the broader evolutionary process. The final segment of the definition, which reads “involving authority or power,” is the crux of this deceptively simple definition.

All relations involve authority or power whether we like it our not. Relations with girlfriends, boyfriends or spouses, children, parents, pets (okay, maybe the goldfish gets a pass), trolls on the internet, or the barista at Starbucks (I need my latte now!). Politics is power.

When John Boyd developed the OODA Loop, he found a means to power for the fighter pilot. Later the OODA Loop would find its way into business and government. In aerial combat, a pilot cycles through the steps of Observation, Orientation, Decision, and Action ad infinum. He scans the airspace for enemies and, upon recognizing a threat, orients the enemy into the broader context of the air battle. Based on this synthesis, the pilot decides and acts in accordance with the provided information.

The idea  is to see what your enemy sees and get inside his OODA Loop. To be able to feint and counter-attack, to anticipate, this delineates an effective usage of the OODA Loop.

For example, let’s presume Pilot A is tailing Pilot B. Pilot B, in an attempt to lose Pilot A from his six, applies hard rudder, angles to starboard and pulls high Gs in a sharp turn that orients him perpendicular to the earth. Pilot A is in a slower aircraft and won’t be able to keep up. But Pilot A, tactically, is inside Pilot B’s OODA Loop, and through a series of quick observations and decisions, he chooses to pull hard to port to intercept Pilot B’s flight line and go for the kill.

The OODA Loop has since been expanded beyond what Boyd originally intended, and has made headway into business and manufacturing circles, amongst other trades. In power conflict, the mind is critical. More specifically, the ability the mind has to adapt and maneuver in congruency with whatever structure, ambiguity, or chaos may surround it. Boyd refers to maneuvers that disorient an opponent–those acts that innervate an opponent’s OODA Loop–as fast transients. The quicker a pilot can cycle through these loops in combat, or the faster a business can recognize and act to solve problems, the more successful each will prove to be.

In life we are forever confronted with challenges, with conflict, with social relations that demand we act. The game grows more difficult as the number of variables increase. By observing and orienting ourselves to the actions of others, we can come to a better understanding of the realities that surround us, and loose ourselves from the placid and comfortable narratives that conceal truth.

And here, it’s important to note that it is action that is what matters. Not words, but actions and the results of those actions. It’s important to make this distinction and not lull oneself into complacency through a susceptibility to outward poses. When confronted with conflict, learn to take action, and decisive action at that. As Boyd said, don’t worry about your own flanks. Instead, make your opponents worry about theirs.

{ 0 comments }

Recent Developments

by Ryan Zielonka on May 28, 2010

Things have come together swimmingly over the past few months. Here’s a look into what’s been occupying my time:

  • I was awarded the National Bureau of Asian Research Next Generation fellowship for 2010-11. I’ll be working alongside some absolutely brilliant people, assembling projects that concern foreign policy. I’ll also be pursuing independent scholarship for potential publication.
  • I’m now writing for WannaBeBig.com, a fitness and bodybuilding website. Daniel Clough is a fantastic guy to work with. I have free reign over what I cover and I couldn’t be happier. I’ll be using WannaBeBig as the platform for my fitness writing, hence the change in content here on the blog. You can read here my first article for WBB titled Elemental Fat Loss: Six Weeks to Grecian Proportions. - Note: photos have been included by the editorial staff that may be inappropriate for work. No nudity, but the article contains your typical fitness mag shirtless guy with abs/girl in a bikini shots.
  • I’ve been reading. A lot. Some of my favorite deep-thought provoking tomes right now include The Right Stuff by Tom Wolfe, Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War by Robert Coram, The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama by David Remnick, and Proust Was a Neuroscientist by Jonah Lehrer.

And with that, have a fantastic weekend!

{ 3 comments }

Google vs. China: The Battle Continues

by Ryan Zielonka on March 25, 2010

A Chinese man looks at a note and flowers left as support outside the Google China headquarters in Beijing. Photograph: Ng Han Guan/AP

In response to increasingly strict demands over censorship, mounting government intervention, and a disastrous cyber-attack in December, Google has decided to pull its search engine functionality out of China. As of March 22nd, 2010, users in China proper are being rerouted away from the Google.cn website to offshore servers based in Hong Kong.

The mainstream media has, thus far, failed to pick up the implications of the decision to route mainland users to Hong Kong. This proves a metaphorical smack in the face to Chinese leadership as animosity between the former British colony and the Communist party runs deep. Hong Kong has long asserted a nominal independence from China since its reintegration in 1997.

Officially a special administrative region, Hong Kong continues to exist as a unique, semi-sovereign global actor. Its political, economic, and judicial systems oppose the “socialist” system of mainland China. When the constitution of Hong Kong came into effect in 1997, Chapter 1, Article 5 of this document titled “Hong Kong Basic Law” was written to state the following:

The socialist system and policies shall not be practiced in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and the previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years.

Whether Google was aware of the latent animosity between Hong Kong, whose population consists of 95% ethnic Chinese, and the Communist party remains unclear. Hong Kong features a regulatory economic system similar to the system employed in the U.S., functions in accordance with English common law, and looks to be on the precipice of universal suffrage, which should come into effect in the next decade or so.

All of this underscores the fact that Google has become a de facto player in global politics, whether it likes it or not. To the rest of the globe, Google reflects the position of the U.S. at large. The idea that a company can act in true independence from its host nation is still a foreign one to most states in the international system. The U.S. remains the outlier in global politics when looking at state-market relations, choosing to take a positivist, laisezze-faire approach to government regulation.

Calls from China demanding that the U.S. government seek action against Google were met with resistance from the White House. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton stated last week that Google’s actions were the exclusive concernof the Google and the Chinese state.

That hasn’t kept the Chinese from stirring the firmament of already strained U.S.-China relations. “The search engine leader’s exit from the Chinese mainland is a deliberate plot,” Ding Yifan, a researcher at the Development Research Center under China’s State Council, wrote in the China Daily. “Google’s case is in essence part of the U.S. Internet intrusive strategy worldwide under the excuse that it advocates a free Internet.”

So where does this leave Google in Asia? The company’s exit from China portends good things for Japan and Korea where Google has hereto struggled to acquire market share from domestic competitors. China’s Asian neighbors are more amendable to the presence of multinational behemoths akin to Google, and will likely welcome the foreign investment with open arms.

{ 0 comments }

Sticky Communication

by Ryan Zielonka on March 23, 2010

What makes an idea sticky? Why are urban legends a thought’s reach away while the arguably more important stuff escapes us so readily?

Take the worry over tampered Halloween candy as one example.

You hear about it every October in your local newscast’s feature on Halloween safety. In 1985, a poll taken by ABC found that 60 percent of parents in America worried their children would be victimized by tampered candy. The results prompted two sociologists to evaluate the veracity of this widespread fear and review every case in which a child was harmed during or immediately after Halloween.  They began with criminal reports dating back to 1958.

The result of their study? Not a single case found of a child hurt by tampered candy.

Somewhere someone had generated a rumor built on an idea so evocative and sticky that for millions of Americans it became a reality.

The story of sticky ideas like this and others is brought to us by brothers Chip & Dan Heath in “Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die” (Random House; $26.00). Chip Heath is a Professor of Organizational Behavior and teaches at the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University. Dan Heath was most recently a Consultant to the Policy Programs of the Aspen Institute and has held research positions at the Harvard Business School.

“Made to Stick” extends the line of thought developed in Malcolm Gladwell’s seminal work “The Tipping Point.” Therein, Gladwell unearths the mystery of social epidemics and argues that ideas underpinning a social phenomenon need to be sticky before the phenomenon can tip and, for lack of a better term, go viral.

The Heath brothers claim that ideas are not born interesting but are instead made interesting. They cite the work of an Israeli research team that, in 1999, identified six advertising templates under which 89 percent of award-winning ads could be classified by an objective evaluation staff. The surprise here was that the most successful ads, the ones you or I would deem most creative and poignant, were in fact more predictable than the uncreative ones, and that creativity can to some degree be systemized and taught.

What the Israeli researchers did for ads “Made to Stick” does for ideas. According to the Heath brothers, sticky ideas share six common traits: a core that’s simple and establishes a strict priority for action, an element of surprise or unexpectedness, a concrete grounding that makes the abstract not so abstract, credibility in the sense that one example can cover limitless contingencies, elements of empathy that arouse emotion, and finally a story or narrative that ties it all together.

The authors’ mission is an ambitious one, and in fulfilling their aims they perform feats of academic alchemy, turning research studies into entertaining and applicable lessons on communication. This book alone has the power to change the way teachers teach, managers manage, and writers write.

The Heath brothers in their introduction identify a universal nemesis, the anti-matter of stickiness they dub the Curse of Knowledge. The Curse of Knowledge addresses the danger of knowing too much, specifically when experts spout jargon or discipline specific concepts to non-experts. This lies at the core of communication breakdown and strategic failure, the book argues, ensuring that the people who need the information most will be certain to never get it.

In response, what the book does is to establish common ground for the presentation of ideas by grounding them in the universal language provided in the six traits. Those in the highest levels of their profession fall in love with the abstract, and so when it’s time to convey ideas to the masses, experts have no clue how to make what’s infinitely interesting to them understandable and applicable to someone outside their field. Experts forget what it’s like to not know what they know.

This book is to communication and marketing what Strunk & White’s “The Elements of Style” is to the English language.

It is, however, not without caveat. The title is somewhat misleading. Yes, we learn how ideas stick, but the ambition of the introduction never finds actualization in the thick of the book. Where, in Malcolm Gladwell’s “The Tipping Point,” the surprises and wonder never really stop, nothing in this book is all that, well, unexpected. The Heath brothers appear to want to stay close to harbor just in case bad weather crops up, and so never take any chances with their research.

Moreover, the somewhat schlocky and now quotidian practice of including some banal business acronym places an artificial limit on the language used in the book. The authors even go so far to rebuke this imposition in the text itself, stating in so few words they had to follow the party line and include an acronym for the sake of the publishers.

The chance that business leaders – the default reader of “Made to Stick” – will use the outlined concepts to enact changes in their corporate environment is quite the lofty goal, and perhaps one that should have taken a back seat to the students, academics, writers, politicians, and analysts who will no doubt have more ready applicability for these concepts. If anything, “Made to Stick” limits itself by aiming for the sky with an audience that may or may not care.

Had this book taken less of a business-intensive approach we would have seen the Heath brothers flex more of their literary muscle. As it is, the writing teeters on the mundane, the examples terse and to the point but lacking in nuance. Great for a plug-and-play business book, not so great for those seeking an in-depth exploration of the topics at hand.

Despite these reservations I can’t recommend this book enough. The book addresses the tried and true concepts of communication but presents them in a way that makes them easy to grasp and apply. A wonderful tome deserving of a place on your bookshelf, regardless of what your career aspirations may be. Best of luck in all your future sticky endeavors.

{ 3 comments }

The Path of Least Resistance

by Ryan Zielonka on March 6, 2010

Image courtesy http://www.getentrepreneurial.com

What is easy is rarely worth it, and what is worth it is never easy. I hear people my age complain about how someone else got a lucky break and is undeserving of their success or someone knew the right people or was born into prodigious circumstances and never had to work.

People underestimate the worth of failure. Experiencing failure – when what you take for granted and what you believe to always be there collapses upon itself – is what ultimately crafts our future. It hardens us and steadies us for the challenges that lie ahead.

The most successful athletes and performers never internalize their failure. They blame the refs or the venue – always an environmental factor – and never themselves. I think most of us would presume that they would blame themselves, thinking about how they needed to practice more or hadn’t studied their opponent well enough, but that’s not the case at all. I think many of us would also assume that this deference of blame is unhealthy egotism, but is it?

Not really. When it’s your job to perform at an elite level, where the difference between success and failure is so narrow and you’re expected to perform at that same level every single day, there is no time to question and no time to ponder. Put simply, neither elite level athletes nor the average person gain anything by dwelling on negative outcomes.

Shifting responsibility provides closure and the necessary clarity to focus on what’s important: the next step.

We will always encounter adversity. It’s how we handle that adversity that shapes our character. And what’s worth doing often incurs a great deal of risk that, while manageable, tends to arouse nervousness and anxiety and fear. It’s that anxiety and fear that tells us we are doing the right thing. I know some people who live by the motto “why try at anything that isn’t a guaranteed success?”

Because whatever that thing is will be a hollow substitute for truly living.

{ 0 comments }

On Angry Waiters and Online Debate

by Ryan Zielonka on February 13, 2010

So often in life we have this tendency to make appeals to a person’s character or personality when explaining some deviant or undesirable behavior. Bad service at a restaurant? The waiter is lazy. Cut off while driving home from work? The driver is an asshole.

We so rarely take a step back from such situations to consider the broader environment or social context of these occurrences. We feed our psyches a false sense of security so as to make the world more palatable to our tastes. The world isn’t simple, and rarely are people decidedly evil or self-serving.

The theory of the fundamental attribution error, the conceptual bedrock of modern social psychology, argues that people over-estimate the importance of dispositional or personality-based explanations when explaining the behavior of others. We tend to under-value the importance of social or environmental context, the situational or institutional constraints that shape and mold another’s behavior.

Perhaps our waiter was still recovering from a late-night bender, working off a wicked hangover when he attended to our table. Maybe the driver that cut us off, a diabetic, was racing home to get in his next insulin dosing.

Malcolm Gladwell, author of the recently released book What the Dog Saw, offers a softer definition of the above. His version of the fundamental attribution error incorporates any situation where one extrapolates the importance of a measured characteristic to a generalized view of a person, attributing measured habituations to unmeasured or unrelated characteristics.

For example, just because a student is punctual and well-mannered gives no indication to his behavior at home. Again, it’s often our environment that shapes how we act. The fundamental attribution error is entirely other-focused, and so we never make these attributions of ourselves. In explaining our own behavior we will cite situational or environmental factors – we had a long day at work, we were hungry, an eyelash was caught beneath our contact lens – to explain errant behavior.

It’s the rare person who can, with objectivity, place his behavior beneath a psychological microscope and analyze his deeper character. This mindfulness pays dividends in our quality of life.

In a recent online debate I happen to participate in, these very same sorts of attributions were thrown around with abandon. This is often the case during heated argumentation when rational appeals take a backseat to emotional responses.

Next time, consider the institutional constraints of an individual before blanketing them with dispositional pejoratives. The subsequent lessons learned can lead us all closer to the truth.

{ 0 comments }

The Definitive Guide to Studying

by Ryan Zielonka on February 7, 2010

Thinking deep thoughts in Seattle

When teetering between the prospect of decades of poverty or, conversely, servitude as a lifelong student (still not sure what the difference is), I had to make some hard choices before my life got out of hand and I turned forty, still waiting for my career to start.

But before I get to attend networking events and participate in team-building exercises as an M.B.A. student (there we go, now it makes sense), I get the opportunity (again) to flirt shamelessly with standardized testing and middle-school math.

I just dropped over one-hundred dollars on test prep material – that’s not counting the toner and paper costs from printing online study prep materials – and in the process abused twenty acres of endangered South American rain forest I’m sure.

I hope the koalas were safe.

Since this all began about a week ago, it’s been a trifle odd. I’ve found a certain intrinsic pleasure in the repetition offered by standardized multiple-choice exams, resembling, in a way, my coffee addiction. It gives me some sense of satisfaction knowing I’ve developed a palette for rote memorization and a substance that tastes like bitter charcoal.

What surprised me is that while I haven’t studied for an exam like this in years, the methods I used during graduate school to study share the same principles as the methods I’m using right now. I thought readers might be interested in how I go about relearning methods and information.

For your perusal, I present The Definitive Guide to Studying.

1. Plan your studying down to the daily and hourly level, blocking out time slots using fixed-time productivity.

I’ve found that the best way to ensure studying gets done is to schedule appointments with myself using Google Calendar and then block out those times. I put my phone on silent, log off all networked services except for a browser window, and lose myself in the crowd at a local student-friendly cafe or coffee house.

Based on pure numbers and material covered, haphazard studying never comes close to the efficiency of planned study. Identify specific targets for your study sessions (say, complete two large sets of practice problems in an hour, identifying mistakes and correcting them) so you don’t just waste time. Nail this and you’ll be well ahead of your classmates from the get go.

2. To better absorb material, introduce novelty by changing your environment.

In my experience, preparing for an exam tends to be an exercise in routine. If you’re utilizing the quiz and recall method you’ll no doubt be covering the same questions a number of times. To help offset the inevitable monotony, set yourself up for success by studying in a novel environment.

I prefer loud, echoey coffee houses that create a wash of white noise, the perfect background for any serious academic. Your particulars may be different, but I urge you to break the routine of studying in the same place you do your more mundane tasks, like Facebook, e-mail, or what have you. The change in environment will reinforce synaptic pathways and help you avoid classically conditioning yourself to performing in a particular environment, only to find yourself at unawares once put into a less-familiar setting.

3. Seek insight.

Your goal in studying shouldn’t be to just refresh your understanding of the material – it should be to master it. By aiming beyond what is necessary, you’ll gain something very special that few of your peers will likely ever achieve – insight.

This is what separates the 4.0 students from the the 3.8 students.

Having a comprehensive understanding of your coursework enables you to adapt and exhibit flexibility in otherwise highly stressful situations. Prepare for the inevitable test jitters by automating your responses.

By the time you sit down for the exam, while challenging, none of the content should be surprising. Like a concert pianist whose movements are automatic, your responses and answers should operate at the same level of fluency and proficiency. This means starting early with your review.

4. Quantify your improvement over the course of your studies through the regular, objective assessment of your progress.

Make regular check-ins with your studying to make sure you’re actually progressing and not just spinning your wheels. This means improving on provided practice exams or sample problems, or increasing your ability to illustrate concepts.

As mentioned earlier, I utilize the quiz and recall method, which is just what it sounds like. Generate questions on your own or solicit sample questions from your instructor. Research your notes and provide the most complete answer you can. Now, memorize the question and requisite answer as a set, no different than when studying vocabulary for a foreign language.

Conceptual questions can be tackled with this method as well. Develop a prompt that demands you elicit a comprehensive answer. An example from my field would be “what similarities do the political theories of classical realism and neoliberalism share with respect to the international system?” Generate an answer key for these sort of questions using your course notes, and again, memorize the question and answer as a set. Come test time, even if you can’t recall your passage in full, you’ll still prove more eloquent and well-read than those who haphazardly prep for such a prompt.

5. Eliminate negative internal dialogue and transform any of those self-limiting beliefs into a positive study experience through mindfulness.

I’ve found this to be the most critical factor in study success. Don’t, under any circumstances, walk into your study session believing you won’t succeed. Be mindful of your internal dialogue; this includes the inevitable pull you’ll feel to distract yourself from the task at hand. Be aware of any undue stress you take with you into your studying. When we’re stressed our brains can’t function and we’re unable create new memories. Bad news for test prep indeed.

Do everything you can to set yourself up for success. Wear your sweats, pop in your headphones (music without lyrics please), and rock out with some Foucault, Hobbes, or calculus derivatives.

—

If this discussion piqued your interest, I encourage you to check out Cal Newport’s website titled Study Hacks. He and I share similar philosophies when it comes to studying, and his articles well worth the read.

Until next time.

{ 12 comments }

A Reasonably Quick Book Review

by Ryan Zielonka on January 31, 2010

Mmm... words.

I love books. A lot. I wish I could read all of them and still feed myself enough food to stay conscious.

But I can’t, and should I seek to remain coherent and mobile – I do – I often find myself struggling with the need to produce content, and in the same breath give attention to the word-filled tomes occupying valuable desk real estate.

See what I mean?

I have friends and know of others who, after the first page, will finish a text regardless of its quality.

I lack that sort of patience My time is too valuable to waste on poorly researched, poorly argued, or quite simply, poorly written books. You would be surprised how many there are out there.

So when Jamie Hale, uber-fitness coach extraordinaire, sent me his book Knowledge and Nonsense: The Science of Nutrition and Exercise to review for my blog, I knew I was in for quite the ride.

When I first opened Knowledge and Nonsense: The Science of Nutrition and Exercise, I wasn’t sure what to expect. Jamie and I met at the JP Fitness Summit last year, an annual event I’ve consequently been invited to speak at for its 2010 iteration. What struck me most upon meeting Jamie was his earnestness in speaking about his clients and coaching practice.

It’s a rarity in the fitness industry to find a guy like Jamie who cares more about education than he does marketing. I’m amazed he hasn’t yet devolved  into jaded isolationism.

Knowledge and Nonsense is perhaps the most comprehensive treatment of diet and exercise I’ve ever laid eyes on. Jamie analyzes with great erudition nearly every diet program available on the market as of his book’s publishing date, 2007. That is a feat in-of-itself, and alone is worth the price of admission. Rather than waste time summarizing the book’s contents, which you can preview here, I’ll instead provide my thoughts and general observations.

First off, Jamie and I are friends, so I’m keenly aware of the time and effort Jamie put into this piece. He self-published the book and sells it independently through his website, thus the book carries Jamie’s heart and soul, untempered by the invisible hand of a publisher or a professional editor. It reads like a Jamie Hale brain dump (this is a good thing), every scintilla of his ken put down on paper for your consumption. The writing is terse but comprehensive and understandable even when particularly complex subjects come under discussion.

Where this book could be improved is in the area of practical application. I kept hoping for a conclusion that synthesized the core elements of Jamie’s approach into something I could take into the kitchen or gym and make use of. We’re swept into the throes of science, and without ample background in the field, beginners may feel overwhelmed. It’s unfortunate as the content teems with vivacity and exuberance, and is no doubt of benefit to readers of all inclinations, but the presentation keeps it from being as accessible as it could be.

This year, it looks as if my wishes will be answered. Jamie will be releasing the mainstream equivalent of this veritable textbook in spring, just in time for a nice pre-summer fat loss stint.

Knowledge and Nonsense is a tour de force of the fitness industry as we know it today. You will find yourself well-armed in debate proving you’ve done your homework and covered this material with ample providence. This work holds special purpose for the fitness practitioner, who should be aware of their competition and understand the theory and research supporting their methods. Nothing is worse for a client than finding their trainer or coach unable to articulate the science underpinning a given exercise or diet prescription.

So don’t be caught off guard and let Johnny sweep the leg. You can arm yourself for potential internet forum combat by purchasing Jamie’s book here, direct from his website.

{ 10 comments }

Is This The Future? – Apple’s iPad

by Ryan Zielonka on January 29, 2010

The catalyst for e-books - Apple iPad (Source: Wired.com)

Apple’s at it again. After much speculation and the usual hype leading up to an Apple product launch, the iPad is finally here.

Unlike the immediate universal acclaim received by its predecessors the iPhone and iPod Touch, Apple’s first foray into the realm of e-readers and tablets has merited quite the ambivalent response.

A number of people have asked me my thoughts on the iPad and what it may portend for the future of tech devices. In this post I weigh in on this curious, over-sized iPod and speculate who may be buying this sleek device that’s been gifted with a rather unfortunate name.

First, this thing is dead sexy. It gets my latent geek juices flowing. Hand it to Apple, they understand aesthetics and how important they are in purchasing decisions. They single-handedly emboldened an entire indie-hipster sub-genre best dubbed ‘geek chic.’ You can find these individuals at your local independent coffee house shotgunning espressos between penning brilliance in their Moleskine notebook and executing rapid-fire hotkey shortcuts on their MacBook.

My gut instinct on Apple’s latest endeavor is that, like its incipient moves into producing digital media players (iPod) and phones (iPhone), they’re going to open up the floor to other companies by showing them that, yes, you too can make money off these sorts of products. Numerous MP3 players and other devices preceded the iPod, but Apple cultivated attention by making the device attractive and integrating it with iTunes. And with the iPhone, Apple won the popularity contest by taking productivity apps out of the realm of Blackberries and putting them into the hands of casual users.

Now is this thing perfect? Far from it. The e-Book crowd won’t likely make the switch given the high price point ($499) and use of LCD rather than e-Ink technology. No one will be discarding their laptops any time soon, and certainly not their iPhones.

So who the heck is this thing for?

My guess: old people, the non-tech savvy, and interestingly enough, college students.

This would explain the rather tepid response of the tech world. It simply doesn’t appeal to them because it just adds another rather useless product category that serves only to duplicate the functions of a phone or notebook computer. However, for someone unfamiliar with these devices, it’s far easier to pick up a tablet and just point to where you’d like to go than haggle with a system boot or having the wherewithal to acclimatize to a device like the iPhone.

Steve Jobs confirmed my hunch when, during the press launch, he alluded to how easy it would be to “pick up the iPad in the kitchen,” access the web and order movie tickets. Sorry, but I try to spend as little time in the kitchen as possible, much to the chagrin of my girlfriend, the graduate student. Speaking of which…

The benefit for college students is a little different. Students and scholars alike work almost exclusively from the PDF format. Readings are uploaded to library electronic reserves and nearly every peer-reviewed journal available is downloadable via PDF. Both my girlfriend and I put all the available eReaders on the market through a rigorous PDF trial and they all failed.

Miserably. To date, our only option has been to overheat our laser printer and get our readings bound by angry FedEx Kinko’s employees.

My hunch is that the iPad will fill this PDF gap given its ability to act as a surrogate laptop and a pseudo e-Reader through Apple’s new service, iBooks. If someone can capitalize on this market and ease the back pain of college students and in the process unload books, course packs, and hastily stapled printouts from messenger bags, they will make a killing.

So there you have it. The Apple iPad. For certain user groups it seems to have real appeal, but for others who work remotely from their laptops, it may just be redundant.

Then again, if they had called it the iSlate, I may have pre-ordered one based solely on the name. Oh well.

{ 3 comments }

← Previous Entries