The Magic Is In The Implementation

Here is a beautiful rendition of the classic "Blue Room" stage illusion which shocked and mesmerised audiences when it was first shown in 1878.




The magic is in the implementation.

Fluent In Memetics

Ah, the difficult labour of teh Intarwoobs:






Electronik brokeback chris crocker rick rolling bus uncle supersonik.


Would you like to know more?
- Lawrence Roberts (Wikipedia)
- List of Internet phenomena (Wikipedia)

The Truest Science Blog

Recently, Bayblab bloggers raised some controversy in the science'o sphere with their article about the current state of science blogging.

Anonymous Coward noted that:

Now there are thousands of blogs dedicated to science, yet only a few are popular. And strangely the popular ones are only loosely related to science. Just take a look at the top 5 science blogs (according to postgenomic):

1 Pharyngula (mostly about creationism)
2 Cognitive Daily (psychology research)
3 Living the Scientific Life (personal journal)
4 Sandwalk (some evolutionary genetics, and creationism)
5 Aetiology (pop science)

Of those only Cognitive daily is consistantly talking about peer-reviewed research. Why is that? Perhaps there is less appeal in discussing recent papers than bashing creationists. But bashing creationists is almost too easy, and not very constructive...

A.C. then added that:

... If you examine the elephant in the room, ScienceBlogs, the trend is maintained: politics, religion books, technology, education and music are tagged more often than biology or genetics. This suggests that their primary motives are entertainment rather than discussing science. Why? Because it pays. Seed Magazine and the bloggers themselves profit from the traffic. That's right, Seed actually pays these bloggers for their posts. And the whole ScienceBlogs thing is a little incestuous, they really like linking to each other, but not so much to the little blogs. I'm afraid gone is the amateur blogger, and in is the professional gonzo science journalist. Might as well read Seed magazine.

They immediately got a massive and largely negative response from science bloggers both inside and outside the ScienceBlogs community. Even heavyweights like PZ Myers and Larry Moran addressed the points in the post.

I think that many of the main points have already been discussed in these blogs and in the Bayblab comments section, so I won't add to those.

However, A.C.'s post has brought two interesting side issues to my attention, and I think it's worthwhile examining these further.

1. Peer-reviewed research papers = Science?

Other bloggers have already debated the suggestion that science blogging should be mainly about peer-reviewed research, akin to a journal club in academia. The consensus view is that science blogging need not be restricted to this - other resources are just as relevant to the main topic of science.

There is another implication - is science really just about discussing research articles? Papers are definitely important, but publishing is on the tail end of a long, long journey.

No matter how boring that paper already looks, the actual process of getting all that data is even less glamorous.

It seems to me that to be a True Science Blog, one should not only write about the highly-polished end product, but should also include the laborious process at the heart of the practice of science.

Often omitted from most science blogs are the arguments, disagreements, tedious experiments, inconclusive results, blind alleys, endless troubleshooting, health hazards, frustrations, self-doubts, mental and physical exhaustion that is the inescapable reality of research.















Will it make for compelling reading?

Difficult to say.

Is it "science"?

Absolutely.

2. Not blogging for money = Noble?

Another curious point is the negative sentiment that some bloggers have about money. A.C. is certainly not the only one to feel this way, and this view is not limited to science bloggers.

Somehow, if the primary motivation for blogging is not some sort of ideal (such as educating the public on good science), then it MUST be for the money.

This is a strange false dichotomy because people can blog for all sorts of non-idealistic reasons that have nothing to do with money.

Here are some common possibilities:

a. fame
b. vanity
c. to relieve stress
d. to practice writing
e. to hone debating skills
f. for social interaction
g. for self-expression
h. for self-education
i. for hot babes (dream on buddy...)

As you can see, none of these are particularly noble reasons to blog.

Yet blogging for money is regarded more negatively than blogging for popularity, for example.

Does it mean that it's OK to be a vain, selfish and rude blogger - as long as you're not rich?

Hmm...

Edison Chen vs Network Biology

Unless you have been living under a rock (or in a lab), you would be aware of a massive sex scandal that has rocked Hong Kong's entertainment scene and hogged their news headlines for the past few weeks.

Lurid sex photos of dashing young actor Edison Chen together with some female celebrities began circulating on the Internet in late January. Apparently, somebody nicked his private collection of photos when he sent his computer for repairs.

The fallout is severe; now the careers of the women who appeared on his photos are in jeopardy. Especially hard hit is actress singer Gillian Chung, a member of the Cantopop group Twins, who had built her career on a wholesome teenybopper image.

That image has been shattered and irate parents are protesting her continued appearance on TV.

Next to be affected is Edison Chen himself, who announced his retirement from the Hong Kong entertainment industry yesterday.














Actually, he had flown in from his hometown of Vancouver to attend this press conference at considerable personal risk. Rumour has it that a triad boss has put out a HK$500,000 bounty to chop off one of Edison's hands.

Though not intentional, one man's action has led to huge headaches for a whole bunch of people.

That instantly reminds me of something else.

You'd never guess...

















This.

A network biology diagram, depicting a cluster of protein-protein interactions in yeast (Barabási and Oltvai 2004).

In a cell, not all genes are equally important to its survival and daily function.

Some key genes hold the network together by interacting with a large number of downstream targets. These genes are called "hubs".

In above diagram, hub proteins are the ones that seem to spawn a "firework burst" of other interacting protein partners.

Hub genes are interesting to me because of their potential role in speeding up the process of biological evolution.

Tiny mutation changes to hub genes can become amplified by successive downstream interactions to become a large biological effect.

Analogous to how Edison Chen's personal collection of photos became amplified to a huge public debacle, due to his "hub" status to all those unlucky women, and hub status as a popular celebrity as well.

Of course, the opposite is also possible - some mutations to hub genes can also stop the evolutionary process if the effects are so large that it becomes lethal to the cell.

Interestingly, not all hub genes are essential genes.

In the diagram above, coloured dots indicate what would happen to the cell if that protein is removed. Red denotes lethal, green means non-lethal, orange results in slow growth and yellow has unknown effect.

In general, hub genes are disproportionately more important to cell than most others.

But a few hub genes can be removed without noticeable effect to the cell. One reason why this happens is because there are many redundant interactions in a cell. No matter how important a gene is, if there is a "spare" (homolog) that can perform its function, then it is dispensible.

Conversely, there are some "recluse" genes at the edge of the cluster that ARE essential to the cell, despite the fact that they don't have many interacting partners. Perhaps these genes fulfill a critical specialized function that cannot be replaced.

To use this in an overextended analogy (a Fresh Brainz favourite!) several organizational levels up to the level of society:

High profile, hub status individuals tend to have a disproportionately larger impact to the whole social group.

However, unless such a person performs a unique, critical and irreplaceable function, no matter how spectacular the situation appears to be, other players will simply step up and the whole thing will blow over almost as quickly as it started.

So in my opinion, nobody will remember this debacle in a few years time.

Nor will they remember its participants, especially the leading man.

Is that good news or bad news?

Sex Videos And Hidden Cameras

The latest scandal to hit the region is the resignation of Malaysian Health Minister Chua Soi Lek, who quit after admitting that he was the man in a sex video that became widely circulated in public.

Fresh Brainz is not so interested in the private activities of powerful people, or the fairy-tale expectations of their conduct by the public.

However, we are fascinated by one detail of this debacle: hidden cameras in hotel rooms.

The reason why we think that hidden cameras are involved is because there are actually two DVDs in this scandal. According to the news report, the first one is 56 minutes long, showing the viewpoint of 4 cameras in the hotel room, followed by the sex video itself, which is 44 minutes long.

This clearly suggests that the Mr. Chua had been set-up.

Of course, most of us will never become a victim of such an elaborate plot, by simple virtue of our rankless, powerless anonymity.

If a sex video involving me and a "personal friend" were to be released in public tomorrow, everyone will be asking: "Leeeng-who?"

Besides, what's so interesting about 44 minutes of vigorous feet-tickling?

*ahem*

Still, we realize that many Fresh Brainz readers are on the fast track to success, and some of you may face an evil conspiracy like this one in the near future.

Thus, as a form of public service, we are happy to present some tips on how to defend yourself against hidden cameras:

1. Know Your Enemy

Modern hidden cameras are so tiny that they can be concealed in just about anything.

Just check out the mind-boggling variety of disguises...



















Very black-hearted.

They come in two main types: hardwired and wireless. Hardwired cameras are directly cabled to a video recorder outside the room. If you find a regular household object sprouting suspicious-looking wires, it may be rigged with a hidden camera.

Wireless cameras depend on a transmitter to send the video over radiowave to a recorder outside the room, so they won't have wires sticking out. However, they contain a battery-powered transmitter (usually operated by 9V batteries), which will add a little more weight to the object. If you find something that feels suspiciously heavier than it normally is, or a soft object that seems to include something hard inside, it could be a wireless camera.

2. Know Your Friends

It's difficult to detect all hidden cameras with the unaided eye. Luckily for you, there are 21st century tools to help hunt them down.

Wireless camera detectors search for the radio frequencies used by camera transmitters to reveal their presence. Some models have a vibration function, so that you can discreetly scan the room without taking it out of your purse or pocket. One model is powerful enough to detect hardwired cameras and camcorders as well.

Reflection detectors use powerful LED lights to capture the glint from a camera lens and can be used to find all types of cameras. However, you'll need to physically check the room by shining the device all over the place, which may make you appear really paranoid to the other guests.

3. Trust No One

Is the hotel room full of conveniently placed accessories? Does it have heavy cabinets, mirrors or other furnishings that are permanently fixed onto the wall?

To avoid getting pwned by hidden cameras, microphone bugs or other forms of survelliance, always keep your guard up.

Don't frequent a particular room, which will give the bad guys a chance to rig up the room. Pick your own room and exercise a touch of randomness.

If the room contains movable furniture, turn them 180 degrees around.

If there are many glassy surfaces, cover them up or tape them down.

It may look paranoid, but if you do it well it can actually make the evening more exciting.

One more word of advice?

Don't make any "personal friends".


Would you like to know more?
- Safety Guide: Hidden Cameras And How To Find Them (a free PDF guide by Main Street Safety)