Observations focused on the problems of an underdeveloped country, Venezuela, with some serendipity about the world (orchids, techs, science, investments, politics) at large. A famous Venezuelan, Juan Pablo Perez Alfonzo, referred to oil as the devil's excrement. For countries, easy wealth appears indeed to be the sure path to failure. Venezuela might be a clear example of that.
While checking to see if the count for Phragmipedium kovachii had gone up in Google today, I noticed that my blog no longer appears….Go figure…..there goes my experiment!!
In addition, the count remains at 33 despite my reference not being there. Later today, the count dropped to 29 and my site reappeared!!!!!!! Mysterious Google….
My brother the Tyromaniac still finds time to blog and look for interesting articles while on vacation in S.F., like the one he posted today by Paul Graham on blocking spam. While filtering should work, I still think that only those that are not uncomfortable with reading the term Bayesian statistics, will trust a filtering system. It will be like the fear of using credit cards online, its irrational, but in the back of their minds the common user will always wonder whether that one once-in-a-lifetime all-important you-are-a-winner e-mail is being blocked by the filtering.
My brother the Tyromaniac still finds time to blog and look for interesting articles while on vacation in S.F., like the one he posted today by Paul Graham on blocking spam. While filtering should work, I still think that only those that are not uncomfortable with reading the term Bayesian statistics, will trust a filtering system. It will be like the fear of using credit cards online, its irrational, but in the back of their minds the common user will always wonder whether that one once-in-a-lifetime all-important you-are-a-winner e-mail is being blocked by the filtering.
My brother the Tyromaniac still finds time to blog and look for interesting articles while on vacation in S.F., like the one he posted today by Paul Graham on blocking spam. While filtering should work, I still think that only those that are not uncomfortable with reading the term Bayesian statistics, will trust a filtering system. It will be like the fear of using credit cards online, its irrational, but in the back of their minds the common user will always wonder whether that one once-in-a-lifetime all-important you-are-a-winner e-mail is being blocked by the filtering.
My brother the Tyromaniac still finds time to blog and look for interesting articles while on vacation in S.F., like the one he posted today by Paul Graham on blocking spam. While filtering should work, I still think that only those that are not uncomfortable with reading the term Bayesian statistics, will trust a filtering system. It will be like the fear of using credit cards online, its irrational, but in the back of their minds the common user will always wonder whether that one once-in-a-lifetime all-important you-are-a-winner e-mail is being blocked by the filtering.
When I wrote Digressions 5 and 5.1, I was aiming it as a general comment on our planet and an interesting bit of information on orchids and species to those that know little about the topic. Today, I noticed that I had a surprising number of referrals early in the day and when I looked at the referers I was also surprised to find that they were mostly (80%) coming from google, but no other search engine. Thus, I decided to perform an experiment to try to answer the question of whether google is simply good, fast in time or simply both. I will repeat the experiment at a later date to test whether time is the important variable or not. I did two searches and the results are posted below. First I searched for my blog, simply searching for The Devil’s Excrement (D.E) in a variety of search engines. Then I searched for the term Phragmipedium kovachii (P.K.) and recorded how many times that searched engine found it and whether my blog was recorded or not.
Engine |
| D.E. |
| P.K. |
|
| (site) |
| (# of times) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes |
| 33 | |
|
|
|
|
|
Yahoo |
| Yes |
| 18 |
|
|
|
|
|
M |
| No |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
H |
| N |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
A |
| N |
| 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
AJ |
| N |
| 0 |
Clearly, Google is much superior. I understand Yahoo uses Google, but it is clearly programmed differently. The question to me is then whether Google is better or faster. It appears to be both, as the discovery of the orchid Phragmipedium Kovachii has been around longer than my site (12 days) or my posts on the discovery (4 days), while the report of the discovery of the orchids is almost two months old (June 18th.). A separate explanation might be that Google has some sort of special cataloguing for blogs that simply distorts my conclusions. I will revisit the searches in one month or so to try to clarify these issues.
Obviously by now my own experiment has affected my numbers, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle at work in experimental blogging, cool!!!!!
When I wrote Digressions 5 and 5.1, I was aiming it as a general comment on our planet and an interesting bit of information on orchids and species to those that know little about the topic. Today, I noticed that I had a surprising number of referrals early in the day and when I looked at the referers I was also surprised to find that they were mostly (80%) coming from google, but no other search engine. Thus, I decided to perform an experiment to try to answer the question of whether google is simply good, fast in time or simply both. I will repeat the experiment at a later date to test whether time is the important variable or not. I did two searches and the results are posted below. First I searched for my blog, simply searching for The Devil’s Excrement (D.E) in a variety of search engines. Then I searched for the term Phragmipedium kovachii (P.K.) and recorded how many times that searched engine found it and whether my blog was recorded or not.
Engine |
| D.E. |
| P.K. |
|
| (site) |
| (# of times) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes |
| 33 | |
|
|
|
|
|
Yahoo |
| Yes |
| 18 |
|
|
|
|
|
M |
| No |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
H |
| N |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
A |
| N |
| 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
AJ |
| N |
| 0 |
Clearly, Google is much superior. I understand Yahoo uses Google, but it is clearly programmed differently. The question to me is then whether Google is better or faster. It appears to be both, as the discovery of the orchid Phragmipedium Kovachii has been around longer than my site (12 days) or my posts on the discovery (4 days), while the report of the discovery of the orchids is almost two months old (June 18th.). A separate explanation might be that Google has some sort of special cataloguing for blogs that simply distorts my conclusions. I will revisit the searches in one month or so to try to clarify these issues.
Obviously by now my own experiment has affected my numbers, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle at work in experimental blogging, cool!!!!!
When I wrote Digressions 5 and 5.1, I was aiming it as a general comment on our planet and an interesting bit of information on orchids and species to those that know little about the topic. Today, I noticed that I had a surprising number of referrals early in the day and when I looked at the referers I was also surprised to find that they were mostly (80%) coming from google, but no other search engine. Thus, I decided to perform an experiment to try to answer the question of whether google is simply good, fast in time or simply both. I will repeat the experiment at a later date to test whether time is the important variable or not. I did two searches and the results are posted below. First I searched for my blog, simply searching for The Devil’s Excrement (D.E) in a variety of search engines. Then I searched for the term Phragmipedium kovachii (P.K.) and recorded how many times that searched engine found it and whether my blog was recorded or not.
Engine |
| D.E. |
| P.K. |
|
| (site) |
| (# of times) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes |
| 33 | |
|
|
|
|
|
Yahoo |
| Yes |
| 18 |
|
|
|
|
|
M |
| No |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
H |
| N |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
A |
| N |
| 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
AJ |
| N |
| 0 |
Clearly, Google is much superior. I understand Yahoo uses Google, but it is clearly programmed differently. The question to me is then whether Google is better or faster. It appears to be both, as the discovery of the orchid Phragmipedium Kovachii has been around longer than my site (12 days) or my posts on the discovery (4 days), while the report of the discovery of the orchids is almost two months old (June 18th.). A separate explanation might be that Google has some sort of special cataloguing for blogs that simply distorts my conclusions. I will revisit the searches in one month or so to try to clarify these issues.
Obviously by now my own experiment has affected my numbers, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle at work in experimental blogging, cool!!!!!
When I wrote Digressions 5 and 5.1, I was aiming it as a general comment on our planet and an interesting bit of information on orchids and species to those that know little about the topic. Today, I noticed that I had a surprising number of referrals early in the day and when I looked at the referers I was also surprised to find that they were mostly (80%) coming from google, but no other search engine. Thus, I decided to perform an experiment to try to answer the question of whether google is simply good, fast in time or simply both. I will repeat the experiment at a later date to test whether time is the important variable or not. I did two searches and the results are posted below. First I searched for my blog, simply searching for The Devil’s Excrement (D.E) in a variety of search engines. Then I searched for the term Phragmipedium kovachii (P.K.) and recorded how many times that searched engine found it and whether my blog was recorded or not.
Engine |
| D.E. |
| P.K. |
|
| (site) |
| (# of times) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes |
| 33 | |
|
|
|
|
|
Yahoo |
| Yes |
| 18 |
|
|
|
|
|
M |
| No |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
H |
| N |
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
A |
| N |
| 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
AJ |
| N |
| 0 |
Clearly, Google is much superior. I understand Yahoo uses Google, but it is clearly programmed differently. The question to me is then whether Google is better or faster. It appears to be both, as the discovery of the orchid Phragmipedium Kovachii has been around longer than my site (12 days) or my posts on the discovery (4 days), while the report of the discovery of the orchids is almost two months old (June 18th.). A separate explanation might be that Google has some sort of special cataloguing for blogs that simply distorts my conclusions. I will revisit the searches in one month or so to try to clarify these issues.
Obviously by now my own experiment has affected my numbers, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle at work in experimental blogging, cool!!!!!
When I began writing this blog, my main objective was to try to convey, particularly to those that live in more developed countries, a sense of what countries like mine are like and what makes us the way we are. I actually began with thoughts on a decision by the Venezuelan Supreme Court not to prosecute four of the Generals that refused to obey orders from President Hugo Chavez to use the military to contain demonstrators in April. This refusal led to the President’s resignation. A new temporary President took charge and decided to dissolve the National Assembly, Supreme Court and other powers, which led to an outcry both in Venezuela and abroad which resulted in the return of Hugo Chavez as President.
Well, the day of my first blog the Court refused to approve the proposal to prosecute the Generals for rebellion. As I said then, I found it depressing that we all knew the decision and the vote even before it took place. What was even worse was that the President of the Court chose a Judge from the minority to write the new opinion. This bizarre decision was simply a way of delaying the decision while the Government pressured the Judges to change their minds. And pressure they did, but not enough as the new decision was also rejected, even if one vote changed sides in favor of the Government. At that time, there was no recourse but to choose a judge from the majority. The President pressured the Court repeatedly, mixing the refusal of the Generals to use force against the people with the fact that the temporary President violated the Constitution. Chavez went as far as saying that if “the referee did not act properly he would get rid of the referee”. But he pressure did not help and today the Court decided by an 11-8 vote that the Generals were not guilty of rebellion (for which you need the use of force).
As the article by Friedman in the NYT today points out, freedom and democracy, however weak, are necessary prerequisites for development. While in India, where democracy is ingrained, the richest man is a software entrepreneur, in Pakistan next door, it is one of the tribal Chiefs that rule the country. Venezuela’s institutions are weak. Two years ago, these judges would have never dared go against the President, he was all powerful and going against him meant losing their jobs. (It is not a lifetime job in Venezuela). But with time, his power, his popularity and his majority in the National assembly have all eroded. This means he has to play a democratic game, which so far he is not ready to do. In his heyday he had 80% popularity, which was bad. Unfortunately for him, he now has barely 20%, bad for him, but I would like to believe good for our democratic system. Our institutions maybe weak, but in time decisions like today should help us strengthen them.
Unknown Feed
The Devil's Excrement 