It’s always a great time-saver to rewrite someone else’s copy (read press release or news feed?) and it can be a space saver too if you leave enough out. Check this one out:
Stiffer roads would save fuel

Study finds that road surfaces contribute to increased fuel use.

Scientists have found that some road surfaces require more energy to drive along, increasing fuel use.

Wow, a softer road will absorb more energy, who would have thought? So make it stiffer and your car will go further. (Excellent. So why not just replace roads with rails, then, and save a lot more?)

Aside from the obvious, this is a statistical modeling study (and fair enough), not an empirical one. And it’s based on US data. But the conclusion is intuitive anyway. Make the road stiffer (thicker asphalt or replaced with concrete or a blend) and you’ll save on fuel consumption. But what the SMH doesn’t mention in Barry Park‘s version of the story is that the research was conducted as part of the Concrete Sustainability Hub at MIT, which is sponsored by the Portland Cement Association and the Ready Mixed Concrete Research & Education Foundation. Now it’s admirable that the concrete industry wants to make concrete “greener” but it’s also worthwhile noting that they want to remain in the concrete industry, too.

So rather than remake roads with stiffer but carbon-dirty materials like concrete, why not open up the thinking and look outside of the box a bit?  Slow cars down: wouldn’t that also save money? Reduce the weight of cars? Or switch more car trips over to public transport. Or – even better – price fuel higher and discourage over-use – there’s an alternative! If we tore up roads or simply poured more concrete in scheduled replacement we may indeed save a relatively small net amount of fuel but maybe there are cheaper, better ways of achieving that? And in any case when it really matters, say where traffic is at its fastest on a freeway, aren’t they ‘stiffer’ concrete or concrete/asphalt layers already?  

There’s a better account of the story, here:
Civil engineers find savings where the rubber meets the road | News | ECN Magazine

The researchers say the initial cost outlay for better pavements would quickly pay for itself not just in fuel efficiency and decreased CO2 emissions, but also in reduced maintenance costs.

“There’s a misconception that if you want to go green you have to spend more money, but that’s not necessarily true,” Akbarian says. “Better pavement design over a lifetime would save much more money in fuel costs than the initial cost of improvements. And the state departments of transportation would save money while reducing their environmental footprint over time, because the roads won’t deteriorate as quickly.”

This research was conducted as part of the Concrete Sustainability Hub at MIT, which is sponsored by the Portland Cement Association and the Ready Mixed Concrete Research & Education Foundation with the goal of improving the environmental footprint of that industry.

“This work is not about asphalt versus concrete,” Ulm says. “The ultimate goal is to make our nation’s infrastructure more sustainable. Our model will help make this possible by giving pavement engineers a tool for including sustainability as a design parameter, just like safety, cost and ride quality.”

Convergence has been around forever and a day. We expected computers to become video/audio/TV media centres long ago and in some sense that’s exactly what happened. Just about, anyway. We also expected devices to shrink, and they mostly have done that. We expected more features in one box and – voila – it’s happened. Some of these innovations were accidental, like accelerometers being used in laptops to save hard drives from hard landings but later becoming part of the user-control function of tablets and smartphones as well. Leading to all sorts of new applications and further convergence, including use of GPS chips so that these mobile devices know where they are in both time and space. Add a camera to that and bingo, hyperfunctional synergism in a box. Or whatever.

And now, following on from digital cameras replacing analog, and smartphones with embedded cameras denting stand-alone, dedicated cameras, we have sunglasses with embedded cameras. At HD resolution, too. Now if you think about it, sunglasses are even more ubiquitous than most common mobile electronic devices. And they are on or about your head whenever you go out. Unlike mobile phones that may sleep in bags or pockets and have to be retrieved, sunglasses are already “there”. So accessibility is a plus.

Battery life may be an issue, as well as storage. But solar recharging and cloud storage may not be far behind, either. At a suggested $US349 or so they are expensive but not that far outside of what you’d spend on a top brand-name pair of sunnies.  So it’s probably a goer, if a slow-burner for now. (Although cyclists and other sports-minded folk will probably lap them up.)  

Some may be concerned at potential privacy invasion, security breach or ease of copyright evasion (just watch a DVD and ‘copy’ it to long-term storage as you go). But let go of those old ideas and get with the future. When this technology is embedded in contact lenses – or in eyes themselves – copyright and privacy will be dead and buried. Better start adapting – or adopting – now.  

Expect WiFi. Expect integrated cell phone – hey, it’s got a microphone already. Expect convergence. Just don’t put ‘em down and leave ‘em behind by accident.  

Pivothead glasses record what you see in 1080p – Images

Pivothead’s entry into the small market of sunglasses with built-in video cameras threatens to knock much of the competition into a cocked hat this April, thanks to its ability to capture 1080p video. The glasses additionally include an 8 MP stills camera, a 44.1 kHz microphone, gyroscopic image stabilization and continuous auto-focus.

OK, so Telstra doesn’t want to start a price war over NBN pricing – but there will be plenty of others offering better packages. So shop around, folks!

And in any case isn’t this a commercial decision by Telstra, to position their NBN product? I can understand the consumer-group argument that Telstra is trying to pull a fast one in some respects (by maintaining copper phone line charges in parallel with NBN charges for example, without volunteering that you don’t need both) but this choice of language  – the cost ‘slugs’ and the ‘battling household’ malarkey is pure spin on the part of the Tele. Who needs to invent a crisis in politics when you have the on-going crisis in Aussie journalism?

Telstra’s $73 slug for NBN package | thetelegraph.com.au

BATTLING households will be slugged at least $73 a month for Telstra’s most basic National Broadband Network service – three times the cost spruiked by the federal government 14 months ago.

Are we really ‘forced’ to stay with Telstra? Nope.

Telstra’s $73 slug for NBN package | thetelegraph.com.au

Telstra will force customers to pay $49.95 a month for its slowest and most basic service and at least $23 a month to keep their phone line, even if they don’t want it.

So much for honest reporting. Again.

The back story here is that support for those caught out in the conversion from analog to digital television, the most vulnerable to this technological change, were always to be supported through the process. Be it a Labor or Coalition government, no-one was to be left behind, stranded with a dead and lifeless analog TV. Of course that’s now forgotten when the actual costs of that promise are met, but there you go. Apparently some people see no need to independently support people in this situation and would prefer that “the market” deal with those who can’t help themselves. We are talking about people who meet specific criteria of Federal Government financial support, including old-age or disability pensioners. The frail, the elderly, the vulnerable. Of course we could choose to ignore their needs and let them and their families sort it out, but then the news media would be all over the government anyway, reporting the regrettable but inevitable pensioner rip-offs, held over a barrel by unscrupulous installers. Hence the promise.  

Yes, we could go out and buy a cheap set top box (STB) and install it ourselves for just the cost of the box and a bit of our time, but this program isn’t aimed at us, is it? So why does the Australian (and now Channel News) pretend that it is? Why label it as “waste” without making a careful, considered comparison first?

When we buy a cheap STB we hopefully realise that it won’t be a top-shelf bells and whistles product with rock-solid reliability and ease of use. We know it will be bare-bones, fiddly and probably a bit buggy, and we are prepared to live with that. We won’t get more than what’s in the box and a basic warranty. We’ll do the firmware upgrades ourselves and make any wiring changes as needed.

It won’t be suited to the target market of Centrelink clients, it won’t include Centrelink’s admin work or the advice of the specialist groups that sought a product based on target usage criteria, including ease of use for the elderly and those with vision or fine-motor impairment. It won’t include home installation and demonstration, nor will it include an in-home warranty or 12 months of phone support. So why pretend that it’s comparable?

You can see the real intent here, it’s not just the opinionated writing style or the lack of factual, realistic comparison – the target is clearly labelled. So why does Channel News name the supposed culprit as the “Labour (sic) Federal Government” rather than the department and other bodies concerned? Why choose to make unfair – indeed ludicrous – comparisons and pin it all on a “Labour” (sic) government? (Yes, they – Channel News – hilariously can’t even get the “Labor” bit right!)

Because they are grinding an axe? Yes, the program could be done cheaper. But would it hit the target? (And when it didn’t we’d get the inevitable whinge about waste, of course.)

Of course the Australian is on the defensive about this because they chose to pick up the story and leave out a few key facts, like the whole point of doing it in the first place. That’s OK, it’s all about waste and mismanagement, they say. Nothing to do with fair and honest reporting, apparently.

How A $19 Digital STB Becomes $698 When Installed By Federal Labour Government – Channel News

If you or I want to buy a digital set top box the cost could easily be under $49, but when the Labour Federal Government go out and buy thousands of the devices, they mysteriously cost $698 a box to connect.

According to the Australian newspaper every set-top box delivered under Labour’s digital TV rollout could be costing the taxpayer an average of $698 — almost double the government’s original estimate and more than 30 times the cost of a box bought from the likes of JB hi Fi.

They are even dearer than a Full HD 40″ TV which can be purchased for $399 from almost any consumer electronics retailer.

Household Assistance Scheme: The Facts | Senator Stephen Conroy | Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy

Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Senator Stephen Conroy today said the Household Assistance Scheme, being rolled out as part of the switchover to digital television, was assisting some of the most vulnerable people across Australia.

The Scheme was developed in consultation with Vision Australia and received support from a specialist Consumer Expert Group, including Media Access Australia and CHOICE (full membership attached).

Media Access Australia is an independent not-for-profit organisation focused on increasing access to media for people with disabilities. CEO Alex Varley said the Scheme is a model for how government programs should be run.

“It has been designed in consultation with the people it will help and is sensitive and responsive to their needs,” (Alex Varley, 12 May 2011, Media Release, Media Access Australia).

The accreditation and registration process for installations has been developed in consultation with the industry: the Australian Digital Television Industry Association, which is the appropriate industry body, and various industry working groups.

Fact: the $350 figure is an average cost for the assistance package per household, not just for a set top box.

Conroy on the defensive as he reveals set-top costs up to $1500 | The Australian

THE cost of converting analog televisions to digital under the federal government’s set-top box scheme has ranged from $158 to $1528 for each installation.

In a statement released late yesterday, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy defended the costs of the scheme, saying the highest-cost conversions occurred in outback Queensland and involved a satellite dish, decoder and new wiring.

In a small country town, the cost was an average of $492, while it was as low as $158 for a household in a large regional city.

Price check on set-top boxes | The Australian

Senator Conroy declares our story is invalid because “it mixes actual costs with estimated costs”. We suggest the word the minister is looking for is not “mixes” but “compares”. Heaven help the taxpayer if Senator Conroy is seriously suggesting that the amount the government spends on a project should not be compared to the amount the government said it would cost.

It is yet another program characterised by waste and questionable probity. It joins other troubled schemes such as pink batt insulation, Grocery Choice, Fuel Watch and aspects of Building the Education Revolution. At a time of fiscal consolidation at home and austerity abroad, you would think the government would be less eager to waste money. Based on the available numbers, the scheme is costing double the original estimate and 30 times the cost of set-top boxes at stores.

Price check on set-top boxes | The Australian

Some critics may accuse this newspaper’s campaign against government waste and mismanagement as reflecting a “Tea Party” ideology. We reject this suggestion as governments across the world are now dealing with the consequences of failing to live within their means and are adopting a more prudent approach to state finances.

Doomed indeed. Doomed to read the mindless utterances of those who don’t understand that flat-rate tax ‘levies’ of any sort – be they called a GST, VAT, Flood disaster or Medicare levy – inherently punish the low-income taxpayer and preferentially reward the high-income taxpayer. Left alone it’s simply unfair, and whilst a sliding-scale means test is not as good as replacing all of these regressive taxes with a properly designed single, progressive income tax, it’s better than what we have.

About all you can say positively about such levies is that they are usually targeted, and in that sense can have a specific economic focus. But fair? They just ain’t.

Which again explains why the Terrorgraph is up in arms about the horror of it all. Their beloved mid-to-upper-middle class may have to forgo another widescreen TV, iPad and oversized 4WD. Oh dear.  

Aussie health costs set to soar | thetelegraph.com.au

HUNDREDS of thousands of middle-income earners appear doomed to a jump in health insurance bills after independent MPs Andrew Wilkie and Rob Oakeshott sided with the Gillard government’s controversial means test of the 30 per cent rebate.

Two million middle- and high-income earners are set to pay up to $1000 more for private health insurance premiums from July 1 after the government moved closer to passing the legislation in the lower house.

A pre-session meeting of a government caucus is “unprecedented”? Never, ever happened before? Somehow I don’t think so. Love the unattributed negative quotes, too. All the better for the Terrorgraph to spin up something from nothing I guess.

PM Julia Gillard calls in entire caucus for crisis summit | thetelegraph.com.au

THE entire Labor caucus has been ordered to an unprecedented weekend brainstorming session before parliament resumes, as Prime Minister Julia Gillard moves to keep her party on side.

All 102 MPs will workshop policy ideas and strategies, with one saying: “We will be getting the butcher paper and Textas out and solving the country’s problems.”

I have my own personal stake in this – my kids just don’t take council library threats seriously enough. They are great readers and borrowers but slack returners. I badger and remind them but if I don’t take control and induce some action they just let it slide. And the reminder letters come. And finally they feel guilt. Or fear. I wasn’t like this as a child (or even now, obviously). I borrowed almost weekly from the council library and saw it as my social responsibility to get the books back as soon as I could. Someone else may have been waiting to borrow them, after all. It seemed natural to think that way, although maybe it was just me. Probably.

Anyway, the Terrorgraph’s Susie O’Brien has had a bad experience and is using her media access to have a bit of a whinge about modern society in general. It’s “sick”, she writes, that a local council calls in a debt collection agency to pursue her child over a book. Well, actually, to pursue her as guardian. (Perhaps that wouldn’t sound so sick.) Now painful personal anecdotes like this can illuminate a real issue or simply distract and distort. This one looks like a mix up over library late fees rather than a society-wide crisis. Yes, there should have been a letter sent, and maybe it just got overlooked – perhaps at both ends. Yes, it was unfortunate and over the top. But it could also be a case study in personal responsibility and teaching kids that if you agree to return books on time – you do so. No excuses.

There’s the root cause here – a late return. Yep, personal responsibility. There are consequences in life if you choose to ignore or to simply “assume” it’ll be OK, no matter how tempting it may be to just let it slide. And whilst the customer service presented here is indeed poor, there has to be some sort of responsibility taken by the consumer. If you borrow and agree to terms, you respect them. Perhaps the poor customer service values represented here simply mirror the lack of respect presented here by the consumer?

The fine and the statement:
It’s a fine mess we’re all meant to cop | thetelegraph.com.au

THERE is something seriously sick about a local council calling in an international debt collection agency to pursue an 8-year-old boy over a $7 overdue library fine.

The later, umm, correction?
It’s a fine mess we’re all meant to cop | thetelegraph.com.au

Yes, the letter was addressed to me as his guardian, but it was a pretty heavy-handed way to treat a kid in grade two on his first proper visit to the library.

And then the rant about everything else, loosely tied back to, umm, a library fine?

It’s a fine mess we’re all meant to cop | thetelegraph.com.au

There is a principle here worth fighting about.

I am tired of cops outsourcing policing to private speed camera operators who make more money by employing more aggressive tactics.

I am tired of having a nice man come to my door and sign me up to an electricity company, only to then have to deal with overseas call centres who put me on hold for my entire lunch break.

Wow. And the principle is? Don’t speed and you won’t be fined? Don’t switch electricity providers without due research? Yes, well, it was an opinion piece after all.

It must be hard filling space in a newspaper, online or off. But do we really want to read this sort of trivial beatup? A visiting cricket team arrives early – yes, early, ie not on time – to a function and is forced to wait 15 minutes – yes, a whole quarter-hour, in the “baking sun” to meet the Prime Minister of Australia. Imagine the shame of it, waiting a full 15 minutes to see the PM. Sigh. Surely we all have better things to do, he says as he draws further attention to the whole waste of space.

Hot under collar: Test tensions as tourists are made to wait at gates

In scenes bordering on the farcical, cricket luminaries such as Sachin Tendulkar​ and Rahul Dravid were made to stand outside the Prime Minister’s Sydney residence for 15 minutes on Sunday before being allowed inside.

Yes, we all want Freedom of the Press but do we want a free press that ignores reason and logic and prints just, umm, anything? They have printed a weak piece on smart meters today, blaming the Gillard government and the Greens for something that is actually commercially desirable. Smart meters are the future of power distribution, be it publicly or privately owned. Full stop. Dumb meters and non-variable pricing is just inefficient and wasteful. So why write a slanted “journalistic” article and an opinion piece making out that it’s a Green travesty? Is the Terrorgraph just dumb (in the colloquial sense) or do they really think their readers are so ill-informed and mindless as to just blame Gillard and Brown and vote Abbott? (Judging by the majority of comments I’d say “preaching to the converted” applies here.)

But smart meters are coming, irrespective. It’s not just a Green thing, it’s a sensible, more efficient thing. Why is that so hard to understand?

The Tele said:
We’re paying high price for Greens | thetelegraph.com.au

A PATTERN is beginning to emerge. Just over one year since the federal Greens entered into a power-sharing arrangement with Labor, and a few months since the Greens assumed the balance of power in the Senate, we can see a certain theme.

Almost every proposal put forward or championed by the Greens either is or would be seriously damaging to the bank balances of middle Australia.

The Greens largely drove the carbon tax, forcing Prime Minister Julia Gillard to embarrassingly reverse her pre-2010 election promise to not introduce such a tax.

The cost of this new tax to businesses and consumers will be hugely significant, and may yet cost Labor its hold on national government.

And FWIW I say:
Blame the Greens if you want but you and I both know that the electricity distributors will phase out “dumb” meters anyway – and that “smart” meters will be standard issue soon enough. And current demand for artificially cheap peak power is driving up our energy bills. We are all paying for this waste – over-cooled houses and oversized video screens running full bore even when no-one’s using/watching/even in the same room. Whereas variable pricing will allow us to choose when and how to use non-essential appliances and encourage non-grid power sources (like home solar). It will shift demand around and ease the need for new capital investment in peak power. So our electricity bills may well be relatively lower with smart meters. Why not mention – and support – that? 

And why shouldn’t power companies charge more for their product during peak periods of demand? We can all make informed decisions on power use, surely? Is the Tele really saying that Australians can’t make smart decisions about their lives? Whilst I’m all for socialism and a fair go we should recognise that this isn’t a planned economy and some things make commercial – and environmental – sense. Yes, keep a safety blanket in place for those who really need it but we don’t need to publicly-fund more middle-class waste, surely? We should encourage efficiency, fairness and choice instead. Charging a fair – and variable – price for power just makes sense. In part it’s the lack of fair, variable pricing that is causing the recent price rises. So what the Telegraph is really supporting is higher prices. Go figure.

Implementing a carbon tax makes sense, too. If we could just let go of old ideas of price control and subsidised over-use and build a better, cleaner and more efficient economy we’ll all be better off.

The “journalistic” article: 
Smart meter technology to drive up the costs of power | thetelegraph.com.au

THE cost of cooling your home and cooking dinner could double under a new Gillard government power proposal.

Charging consumers more for electricity during the evening peak, and less at other times, is among a raft of “policy options” contained in a discussion paper made public yesterday.

Mind you, this is just a “discussion paper”, apparently. And how much does it cost to cook dinner now? A dollar? So it may double to $2? That matters more to some than to others, but wait, there’s more…

Smart meter technology to drive up the costs of power | thetelegraph.com.au

Other proposals put forward in the paper include minimum energy standards for appliances, rebates and green building regulations.

So if you choose wisely you could land a cheaper-to-run cooking appliance and get back some of that extra cost. And that “rebate” may be aimed at home cooking, who knows?

Smart meter technology to drive up the costs of power | thetelegraph.com.au

There is also a bizarre plan allowing energy companies to remotely control home airconditioners in high-demand periods in return for a discount at other times – a move experts say would hit western Sydney hard.

So the Telegraph “journos” think this is bizarre, apparently. They may all be unaware anti-tech Luddites, who knows? But if you agree to your smart meter adjusting your air con whilst you cook dinner – it’s called “smart” after all – then you may recoup some or all of the extra cooking cost. Frankly that makes great sense. So why is it bizarre? (Yes, I have air-con and on average I use it once a year, just to make sure it still works. Dimming your air con for an hour or so is hardly going to kill you.)

As usual one can only sigh.

Labor can never win with the Terrorgraph. It’s always wrong, wrong, wrong. Even when the link is tenuous, thin and weak – or even unfounded. Doesn’t matter, it’s just Labor.

So an ex-bureaucrat has seemingly spilled the beans that the NSW Department of Environment Climate Change and Water (not Labor directly but they were in government after all) has chosen not to publish either of 6 or 5 (take your pick, it’s a bit unclear if 1 of 6 was published) internal reports contrary to public policy. Were they weak reports, good reports, flawed or just uninteresting? Irrespective. the Terrorgraph suggests just that they were suppressed. So there may be a story there. or not. We just don’t know yet.

But from what is presented it’s a weak argument anyway. The tone of the article and the comments is somewhat denialist, and you could be forgiven for believing that the ex-bureaucrat Doug Lord is, too, denying anthropogenic climate change. Indeed the Terrorgraph has slapped this in the middle of the article: “Do you believe the science of climate change, or is it all one big con job? Tell us below“. Yet in the article itself he documents rising sea levels. And in his published work and on his own company’s website he admits to a belief that climate change is both real and that it has a human origin. What  Mr Lord draws attention to in particular here is an apparent linear, constant rate of mean sea level rise at one site in Sydney Harbour, whereas many other sites show an accelerating rate. Which is one reason why the accepted sea level rise predictions have a range of values, from low to high. Mr Lord’s position as stated is at the lower end of that range. But it’s still happening, and if other factors fall the wrong way it may well accelerate.

So do we sit on our hands and just deny, or do we take action to address a clear risk?

It’s worth noting that whilst having longitudinal data for one site is good, we have to accept that it may also be atypical. It’s in Sydney Harbour after all – and Sydney Harbour has changed a lot in the dataset’s 120 years. Whilst I am sure some correction has been made for hydrological changes (it’s Mr Lord’s area, after all) it’s still just one site. Drawing global conclusions from one dataset would be contrary to good science. But it does make for good press, apparently.   

Climate change science being stifled by NSW Labor bureaucrats | thetelegraph.com.au

SENIOR bureaucrats in the state government’s environment department have routinely stopped publishing scientific papers which challenge the federal government’s claims of sea level rises threatening Australia’s coastline, a former senior public servant said yesterday.

Doug Lord helped prepare six scientific papers which examined 120 years of tidal data from a gauge at Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour.

The tide data revealed sea levels were rising at a rate of about 1mm a year or less – and the rise was not accelerating but was constant.

“The tidal data we found would mean sea levels would rise by about 100mm by the end of the century,” Mr Lord said yesterday.

“However the (federal) government benchmark which drives their climate change policy is that sea levels are expected to rise by 900mm by the end of the century and the rate of rise is accelerating.”

It’s not all about Steve, folks.

And that’s Jobs, not his pal Wozniak who got out much earlier and hasn’t played the ‘Messiah’ role quite like the “other” Steve. I’m an admirer of both of these Apple founders, and liked their early pre-Mac products because they helped open up low-cost personal computing. And I don’t mind either that they (Apple Computer) made the market larger by embracing the GUI. It’s all good stuff. But I find the more recent holier-than-thou Apple marketing spin nauseous. Coupled with a dislike for messianic born-again leaders like Jobs I guess I have to say that I’m not overly impressed with Apple as a company, as sleek and stylish as their products may be. But I do recognise that they have a knack for functional, intuitive design, too. At a price.

And I’m not forgetting Steve’s years in the wilderness, his Pixar work or even Next. He clearly had vision, and the cash to see it through.  

With all of that in mind, here’s a quick and dirty run past some alternative universes where other truths may lie… 

Was Apple first to market with the MP3 player? Nope. I can remember the first MP3 files and players (on the PC platform) in the mid to late 1990s and the first portables a little later. There were rumours that a slick new design was being hawked around companies like IBM and HP but that Apple eventually took it up. I’ve never seen the truth or proof there but Apple certainly wasn’t first, nor was it the best. It may have had the best interface, though. And the best marketing. 

MP3 Insider: Introducing the world’s first MP3 player – CNET Reviews

Ask even seasoned MP3 buffs about the first MP3 player, and they’re almost certain to name the Diamond Multimedia Rio PMP300. If they really know their stuff, they’ll even tell you that it came out in late 1998. They’re wrong either way, although you shouldn’t be too harsh on them–their mistake is understandable.

Diamond Multimedia Rio? Not Apple?

MP3 Insider: Introducing the world’s first MP3 player – CNET Reviews

The Diamond Rio’s false status as the first MP3 player is practically cemented in technology lore, so before it’s too late, I want to set the record straight. The world’s first mass-produced hardware MP3 player was Saehan’s MPMan, sold in Asia starting in the late spring of 1998. It was released in the United States as the Eiger Labs MPMan F10/F20 (two variants of the same device) in the summer of 1998, a few months before the Rio.

Eiger Labs, not Apple?

MP3 Insider: Introducing the world’s first MP3 player – CNET Reviews

Here comes the irony: In 1998, Compaq’s engineers made the first hard-drive-based MP3 player and licensed it to a Korean company (Hango) that didn’t do much with it. In 2001, the first iPod came out. In 2002, HP acquired Compaq. In 2004, HP made a deal with Apple to distribute HP-branded iPods. I know I’m reducing the situation, but it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch to assert that the entity now known as HP beat Apple in the race to make a high-capacity portable music player by three years–an eternity in the world of MP3 players–and still somehow lost.

Eh, Compaq and Hango, not Apple?

Portable media player – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The world’s first company to announce a portable MP3 player and the attendant system for uploading MP3 audio content to a personal computer and then downloading it onto a personal MP3 player was Audio Highway. Under the direction of founder and CEO, Nathan Schulhof, Audio Highway announced its Listen Up player on September 23, 1996,[5] won an Innovations Award for its Listen Up player and its Listen Up Personal Audio System at the Consumer Electronics Show in January 1997,[6] and began shipping the Listen Up player in the United States in September 1997.[7] The Listen Up player also won a People’s Choice Award[8] at the 2nd annual Internet Showcase conference, held Jan. 30, 1998. The device was not mass-produced; only about 25 units were made.[9]

As the lead inventor on three U.S. patents,[10][11][12] as well as co-inventor on another U.S. patent,[13] Schulhof is sometimes referred to as “the father of the MP3 player industry.”[by whom?]

Gosh, no Apple here at all. In brief, they were 3 years late to the party with a device that did less but had a funkier, easier way to navigate the files. And better marketing.

What about first first tablet computer?

Again, not Apple. Well it depends, actually. The Apple Newton may indeed have been ahead of the pack but they ditched it. What Apple did later do was take what laptop makers were doing with accelerometers and WiFi and add in some mobile (cell) phone functionality. So they pretty much just up-sized their own smartphone. Which is a cool innovation, sure.

Tablet personal computer – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term was made popular with the Microsoft Tablet PC concept presented by Microsoft in 2001.[1] Today, the term tablet is also used to refer to computer-like devices operated primarily by a touch screen but not intended to run general PC operating systems or applications.

Microsoft, not Apple? Oh dear.

But wait…

Tablet personal computer – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Following Windows for Pen Computing, Microsoft has been developing support for tablets running Windows under the Microsoft Tablet PC name.[2] According to a 2001 Microsoft definition[3] of the term, “Microsoft Tablet PCs” are pen-based, fully functional x86 PCs with handwriting and voice recognition functionality. Tablet PCs use the same hardware as normal laptops but add support for pen input. For specialized support for pen input, Microsoft released Windows XP Tablet PC Edition. Today there is no tablet specific version of Windows but instead support is built in to both Home and Business versions of Windows Vista and Windows 7. Tablets running Windows get the added functionality of using the touchscreen for mouse input, hand writing recognition, and gesture support. Following Tablet PC, Microsoft announced the UMPC initiative in 2006 which brought Windows tablets to a smaller, touch-centric form factor. This was relaunched in 2010 as Slate PC, to promote tablets running Windows 7, ahead of Apple’s iPad launch.[4]

At least the Apple Newton pre-dated Microsoft’s efforts, then. Phew.

iPad – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Apple’s first tablet computer was the Newton MessagePad 100,[22][23] introduced in 1993, which led to the creation of the ARM6 processor core with Acorn Computers. Apple also developed a prototype PowerBook Duo-based tablet, the PenLite, but decided not to sell it in order to avoid hurting MessagePad sales.[24] Apple released several more Newton-based PDAs; the final one, the MessagePad 2100, was discontinued in 1998.

What about smartphones?

Smartphone – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first smartphone was the IBM Simon; it was designed in 1992 and shown as a concept product[10] that year at COMDEX, the computer industry trade show held in Las Vegas, Nevada. It was released to the public in 1993 and sold by BellSouth. Besides being a mobile phone, it also contained a calendar, address book, world clock, calculator, note pad, e-mail client, the ability to send and receive faxes, and games. It had no physical buttons, instead customers used a touchscreen to select telephone numbers with a finger or create facsimiles and memos with an optional stylus. Text was entered with a unique on-screen “predictive” keyboard. By today’s standards, the Simon would be a fairly low-end product, lacking a camera and the ability to install third-party applications. However, its feature set at the time was highly advanced.

Oh, so IBM beat Apple both by concept and production. You’d never think that, would you?

Smartphone – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Nokia Communicator line was the first of Nokia’s smartphones starting with the Nokia 9000, released in 1996. This distinctive palmtop computer style smartphone was the result of a collaborative effort of an early successful and costly personal digital assistant (PDA) by Hewlett-Packard combined with Nokia’s bestselling phone around that time, and early prototype models had the two devices fixed via a hinge. The communicators are characterized by clamshell design, with a feature phone display, keyboard and user interface on top of the phone, and a physical QWERTY keyboard, high-resolution display of at least 640×200 pixels and PDA user interface under the door. The software was based on the GEOS V3.0 operating system, featuring email communication and text-based web browsing. In 1998, it was followed by Nokia 9110, and in 2000 by Nokia 9110i, with improved web browsing capability.

In 1997 the term ‘smartphone’ was used for the first time when Ericsson unveiled the concept phone GS88,[11][12] the first device labelled as ‘smartphone’.[13]

OK, so Nokia beat Apple, too. And Ericsson as well. Anyone else?

Smartphone – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2000, the touchscreen Ericsson R380 Smartphone was released.[14] It was the first device to use an open operating system, the Symbian OS.[15] It was the first device marketed as a ‘smartphone’.[16] It combined the functions of a mobile phone and a personal digital assistant (PDA).[17] In December 1999 the magazine Popular Science appointed the Ericsson R380 Smartphone to one of the most important advances in science and technology.[18] It was a groundbreaking device since it was as small and light as a normal mobile phone.[19] In 2002 it was followed up by P800, the first camera smartphone.[20]

Gosh, so Apple didn’t even win the race to include a camera. Given that there’s a heap of Palm, Blackberry and Windows devices yet to come, what exactly did Apple invent here?

Smartphone – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2007, Apple Inc. introduced its first iPhone. It was initially costly, priced at $499 for the cheaper of two models on top of a two year contract. It was one of the first mobile phones to be mainly controlled through a touchscreen, the others being the LG Prada and the HTC Touch (also released in 2007), though the iPhone was the first mobile phone to use a multi-touch interface. The iPhone featured a web browser that Ars Technica then described as “far superior” to anything offered by that of its competitors.[30]

OK, so Apple were again years behind the real innovators but came in late with a better browser and a multi-touch interface. Well that’s still innovation, but like all great innovations it was built on previous work. And it was a slick device made even slicker with the later App Store functionality. In many ways that easy-to-use shopping function was the clincher. Add in great marketing and whammo, success.

What about the GUI? Apple was first there, surely?

History of the first GUI

When the Macintosh was introduced in 1984, it represented something altogether new to the public – an affordable Graphical User Interface (GUI) on a computer with a mouse. Suddenly, while others were typing commands like “del index.com,” Mac users were dragging and dropping the image of a file into the image of a trash can. Users had a computer with an interface that made sense (intuitive).

Phew. New to the public. So they invented it, right?

History of the first GUI

But although Apple was the first to successfully mass-produce a GUI, they were not its inventors, nor were they the first to market it.

The honor for producing the first working GUI goes to Doug Englebart​ – at the time an employee of Stanford Research Institute​. Englebart and colleagues created a program called the oNLine System in 1965-‘68. This program used the first mouse, a windowing system, and hypertext, and was based on a description of a system called “memex” proposed by Vannevar Bush in 1945. The name “mouse” comes from this period. The mouse used in oNLine had three buttons on one end and the line coming out the other end. Apparently, the buttons for eyes and nose, plus a cord for a tail, reminded the users of a mouse and the name stuck.

Oh, so Apple didn’t actually invent it. But their messianic leader Jobs, presumably, had the vision to take over other people’s ideas and package them in a way that sold. Are you seeing a pattern here?

There’s plenty more to this story but you have the gist of it. What I wanted to offset was this “Jobs – the man who changed the world” sort of media spin, which doesn’t recognise at all that many other people at other companies and institutions “innovated” just as hard – if not harder – before Apple added their unique and very stylish ‘extras’. In some cases Apple took bits out before others, like disk drives, and in other ways produced something that felt better in the hand or looked better to the eye. Or they came up with a better interface, or a better way to access extensions like Apps. Now I see that as icing rather than the cake itself. What do you reckon?

But it’s not just about me, either. So here is another, more celebratory view:

Thanks to Steve Jobs, we all think differently | FP Tech Desk | Financial Post

There’s a reason Mr. Jobs was named “CEO of the Decade.” Never has a CEO meant so much to one company or been as inextricably tied to a single brand identity. Indeed, there will be much to read about Mr. Jobs, his life and his legacy in the near future.

What matters is that in a very real sense, Steve Jobs changed the world.

Thanks to him, we all think a little bit different than we did before.

Yes, yes, I know, I’m overly pedantic. I also shouldn’t read this rubbish. (But if you do hanker after a selfish yet frugal sports car then a 1.6l engine in a light body is a good start.)

What actually caught my eye was yet another rendition of the “affect” vs “effect” saga:

Lotus’s new Club Racer

The Elise’s steering is not power assisted in any way, so every input you make using the steering wheel is instantly affected by the front wheels.

Affected? You could possibly, maybe, make a case for the front wheels affecting steering response but in this particular context surely the language-challenged Fairfax journo meant to write that each individual steering input is effected – ie put into effect – by the front wheels. Surely.

I mean, is it really that hard to correctly choose between effect and affect?

Somehow opinionated Terrorgraph columnist Miranda Devine has contrasted private “social values” research by Quantum Market Research to the Gillard government’s decision to implement a Carbon Tax and in so doing “proved” that Julia is simply out of touch. The basic premise here is that as family values are at the heart of what Australians believe in, there is no room for a Carbon Tax as well. They are mutually exclusive, apparently, and discrete entities with no interaction. The fact that we are getting one anyway (a Carbon Tax, I mean) proves that the Gillard government just isn’t listening. Another nail in the coffin for Julia.

I suppose it also means that a government should only follow, never lead. It probably also means that a good government will only concentrate on supporting programs that enhance these core “family values”. And if climate change erodes our shores, floods coastal towns and threatens our food supply then it’s of no consequence to our “family values” and should be ignored.   

All very readable and logical. I can see why she has a following.

What really caught my eye was that she even manages to explain a few more things with her exemplary research:
 
What Australians really want | Daily Telegraph Miranda Devine Blog

The average Australian has year 8 reading skills and feels “disempowered” by an increasingly complex world. Something like choosing a mobile phone company just becomes too difficult.

Now I understand. Not only should the government give up any pretence to leadership, it should dumb everything down, make it dead simple and speak s-l-o-w-l-y. We are dealing with children, after all.  (And therefore I do wonder how the 2000 ‘average Aussies’ sampled by Quantum were able to give accurate answers to the complex self-assessment questions posed. Perhaps they just took a stab at it and went out to play in the backyard instead?)

I’m sure Miranda’s loyal readers are well above average. of course. 

I know he’s just an amiable stooge for Tony Abbott in this anti-Carbon Tax malarkey (and I mean that in the nicest way) but surely even he can see that ‘proving’ that the coal industry in NSW will only grow by 60% of what it would have done without a tax isn’t very helpful to the anti-action denialist cause?

Firstly it’s still growing, but its predicted growth is simply reduced by 40% (yes, that’s loaded with assumptions and a timescale, too, so a large grain of salt is needed). Whereas if you take Tony Abbott at his word he expects the coal industry will be killed off completely. Now to my mind when something’s dead it ain’t growing at all. Whereas this coal mining beast is apparently still alive and kicking! And secondly, given that we will still consume energy and by all expectations grow in population to boot, it proves the tax works. Yes, coal declines and (here’s the flipside) resources are successfully diverted to the renewables sector. I thought Tony said it did nothing at all except create a money-go-round? How can Barry contradict Tony like this!

And I note that jobs created in the renewables sector aren’t mentioned at all. Bravo to the SMH for asking the question. There must be some jobs created to meet the gap created…. surely?   

Carbon tax ‘will cost’ 31,000 NSW jobs

Mr O’Farrell said the tax would reduce the NSW mining industry’s growth to about 60 per cent of what it would have been.

Carbon tax ‘will cost’ 31,000 NSW jobs

The NSW government did not respond to the Herald’s questions about why the Treasury modelling appeared not to include potential jobs gained through the development of renewable technology.

Note also that “confidential” seemingly doesn’t have the meaning it once had: 

Carbon tax ‘will cost’ 31,000 NSW jobs

The confidential cabinet document shows the federal tax will result in the loss of 1850 jobs in the Hunter region and 7000 fewer jobs would be created in the Illawarra. The central west would lose 1000 jobs.

Compare and contrast the Herald’s more balanced reporting with the Terrorgraph’s slanted, opinion-laden and more colourfully-worded “report“:

Julia Gillard’s power pledge an empty promise | thetelegraph.com.au

THE carbon tax will inflate electricity prices by up to $200 a year more than Julia Gillard promised, demolishing claims her compensation package would ensure most people were hardly affected.

A NSW Treasury review into the carbon tax ordered by Premier Barry O’Farrell found electricity prices would go up by 15 per cent – not the 10 per cent predicted by the Prime Minister. That would mean an increase in a high-usage household of $498 a year, $300 for a medium-usage household and $183 for a low-usage household.

The Terrorgraph even manages to throw some mud at the French as well! Perhaps ‘proving’ that Gillard favours the French and the Victorians over the poor old New South Welsh-men and women? Or do we simply have cleaner, blacker coal and must therefore pay the price for our foolishness? 
 
Julia Gillard’s power pledge an empty promise | thetelegraph.com.au

The report found that while the French government would receive $800 million in compensation as the owner of a power station in Victoria, no NSW power generator would be compensated.

Need I say more?

Well, opinion polls are only as good as the questions asked and the answers given, but as questions and answers go this poll is a doozy. Along with a slew of similarly skewed, slanted and disgracefully unprofessional mini-polls about the carbon tax there’s this jolly little effort (see below for link and text). It’s craftier than it looks and a real trap for the less vigilant Terrorgraph reader, of whom by the way 88% (at this point in time) believe that the compensation measures are “disgraceful”. Presumably they mean unnecessary or perhaps inadequate, although only 2% actually said “inadequate”, so what these 88% are bitching about is a little unclear. Badly worded question, I guess.

But what really gets me interested is that when asked if the tax will change their energy consumption (which if you have been following closely will surely rise in cost) almost 65% say “no”. Hmmm. What are they thinking here? Well the Terrorgraph muddied the waters by tagging “no” with “climate change is a myth” but let’s ignore that muddiness for now and take “no” as “no”. After all it can’t really be a “yes”, can it? Anyway, logically we can presume that these thoughtful respondents are prepared to pay more for electricity and other carbon-taxed energy sources “just because“. They aren’t thinking they’ll actually be well compensated, no, as only 11% picked that option. They just want to pay more for the heck of it. Well that’ll make a difference, eh?

OK, they could have just been fooled by the incredibly biased wording, but hey, I like to think that they are just prepared to pay through the nose in order to guzzle dirty power no matter what it costs. And that’s their right, of course. Ironically if they do follow through on this cussedness they’ll continue to line the pockets of the polluters whilst simultaneously boosting carbon tax revenues! You’d think they’d go the other way and deprive the hated Gillard government of tax revenue but no, these proud Aussies are going to fund the very compensation (and renewables) package that apparently they find so “disgraceful”.

Ah, Terrorgraph readers, like that paper’s “journalists”: so predictable, yet not quite thinking it all through. Bless them.  

Julia Gillard digging herself a deeper hole over the carbon tax | thetelegraph.com.au

Results: Your say

Thanks for voting!
Will the carbon tax change your energy consumption?

Yes, I’ll make cuts to save money 15.18% (3055 votes)
Yes, green is the way to go 8.98% (1808 votes)
No, I’m being compensated – why change? 11.04% (2222 votes)
No, climate change is a myth 64.79% (13038 votes)

Does this sort of tainted, slanted “reporting” actually sell papers? I must admit I haven’t bought a Terrorgraph for decades and it’s only in the online world that I get to see the wretched thing, but surely people don’t buy it for the biased, negative journalism. Or do they?

Apparently it matters to Terrorgraph readers who gets “hit” the hardest. Unsurprisingly it’s Sydney! Congratulations Sydney!
Hardest hit by carbon tax is Sydney | thetelegraph.com.au

Hardest hit by carbon tax is Sydney

But not just Sydney-siders, it’s the struggling ones in particular that will do the heavy lifting for us all, apparently!

Hardest hit by carbon tax is Sydney | thetelegraph.com.au

Struggling Sydney families will bear the brunt of the tax

Confusingly those same struggling Sydney-siders will presumably miss out on the “spending spree”. Perhaps they all drive trucks or earn over $80K pa.

Hardest hit by carbon tax is Sydney | thetelegraph.com.au

The government will embark on a $15 billion spending spree today

But no, the Terrorgraph has worked out exactly who will miss out and thus be confined to penury:

Hardest hit by carbon tax is Sydney | thetelegraph.com.au

the sting comes for almost two million households which will end up out of pocket, being only partially compensated for a 0.7 per cent increase in the cost of living – or receiving no assistance at all.

The compensation package will leave a double-income family in Sydney with two children earning $120,000 of combined income $400 a year out of pocket after tax cuts due to cost of living rises of about $700 a year.

Dual-income $150,000 families with two kids will be $506 worse off under a carbon regime.

A single-income family on $65,000 a year with a child under five will also end up worse off.

And apparently, despite the renewables package and the $23 a tonne disincentive to pollute the whole thing achieves nothing:

Hardest hit by carbon tax is Sydney | thetelegraph.com.au

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said millions of Australians would be worse off under the tax: “You have to ask yourself, what is the point of all of this? It will drive up prices, threaten jobs and do nothing for the environment.”

So by that logic Tony Abbott’s renewables package is also a crock. Who’d a thought?

Rumblings? Concerns? Should we be surprised? Nah. The O’Farrell opposition promised us that in government they would sort the infrastructure mess out whilst simultaneously getting rid of the backroom deals betwen mates and fixing the shonky state of finances. And we all know that’s code for replacing one set of mates and deals with another somehow more transparent set, going forward. It’s always going forward, never backward in this game. And no matter how transparent the process it’s always going to be as much about who you know as what you know. That’s called business connections and networking. Going forward, of course.

Sidenote: the higher-quality yet leaner SMH crew managed to turn a simple plural into possessive case as well, as in “the submission’s” below. Can’t help myself, can I? 

O’Farrell on the spot after rail privatisation rumblings

”Paint the picture, get the five-year plans, lock them into forward estimates, view the submission’s coming forward and make sure they are delivered efficiently,” Mr Broad said of Infrastructure NSW’s responsibilities.

”We would be a prime mover in bringing the private sector into those investments,” he said. ”We want us to be a point of call for them [private sector].”

Mr Broad said another aspect of his job would be to provide reports that could act as guides for governments to follow. ”Our reports will be published,” he told the Herald this week.

”If you think of the Industry Commission type reports, which become reference documents … I think that’s a very powerful arm.”

OK, point is that it’s a new version of Final Cut Pro. That’s cool, in a way, but I don’t use it. And I’m not altogether sure what Matthew Lentini is on about with his choice of words here. Surely one can choose to flaunt something “good” that you yourself have (should you be so ungracious as to do so, of course) but how can you (or a company such as Apple) be “flaunted” for some apparent quality? Know what I mean, Matthew? Steve Jobs or Apple may choose to flaunt their software’s simplicity in some ostentatious display of Apple-ness but you can’t say that Apple (or Jobs) is ‘flaunted for it‘. At least not in my book!

‘Vaunted’ wouldn’t work very well either, so perhaps it was “praised” or “lauded” that you were looking for? 

New Apple Final Cut Pro X Goes Automatic – Channel News

While Apple is flaunted for its software’s simplicity

flaunted – definition of flaunted by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

v. flaunt·ed, flaunt·ing, flaunts
v.tr.
1. To exhibit ostentatiously or shamelessly: flaunts his knowledge. See Synonyms at show.
2. Usage Problem To show contempt for; scorn.
v.intr.
1. To parade oneself ostentatiously; show oneself off.
2. To wave grandly: pennants flaunting in the wind.

You’d think they’d have moved on by now but no, the Daily Terrorgraph can’t help itself. Not only is former Premier Keneally cast as an “American” in this shabby piece but they go out of their way to spin it up as some sort of dire dereliction of duty. Sure, she should be in parliament, it’s her job; but she did check first and is in any case keeping a commitment to her family. It’s not as though her vote will be crucial in the coming days. (NSW State Parliament sits this week but is off for the following month.)

Kristina Keneally, an American in Paris, leaves ALP baggage behind | thetelegraph.com.au

She’s travelling through Europe to get over it – when she should really be in parliament.

But that’s not all, is it? Oh no, she’s picked her son up from a dental appointment as well! What was she thinking?

Kristina Keneally, an American in Paris, leaves ALP baggage behind | thetelegraph.com.au

She also took leave to pick up her son from a dental appointment – all leading to speculation she could retire from her Heffron seat before her term is out.

It seems that in the Terrorgraph’s world sitting members are precluded from having family. Whilst MPs are definitely a perverse crowd of workaholics, I can’t recall this sort of nonsense having been written about male parliamentarians, so I guess it just never happens with them, does it? Presumably in the Terrorgraph’s world male MPs have wives to do that sort of thing. How will we ever achieve equity for women in our society when the tabloid media actively undermines female MPs like this?

No one wants to be ripped off, but surely it’s a seller’s right to charge what they want? If the price is too high, just look elsewhere. Of course if there are no alternatives – and especially so if the product is something essential in our lives – then the situation becomes more substantial. And that’s why we have set up regulatory bodies to oversee competition and pricing on many things.

We still fret over big oil ‘gouging’ us mere cents on petrol prices (despite having the power to swap to smaller cars or public transport) yet cheerfully ask – and often get – ludicrously high prices when we sell our real estate. All of those home sellers out there gouging the buyers not only get let off without public scrutiny but the highest sales actually get celebrated! Whoopee, another record price! Now housing is even less affordable! Yes!

I can’t talk, I doubled my money in real estate in the late ’80s (and spent it all in the ’90′s). But I don’t whinge about the price of minor consumer items, either.  

Why, for example, is setting a recommended price of $129 on a range extender such a big deal that it gets touted as ‘price gouging’? Did someone’s eye get taken out? This is, after all, a recommended price only. I’m sure you could buy one for way less than RRP. It’s just an example – a small one, admittedly – by which we trivialise and demean our language and our lives. It’s exaggeration, and it’s par for the course.

Netgear Price Gouging With 54% Mark Up On New Wi Fi Gear – Channel News

US networking company Netgear is asking Australian customers to pay 54% more for a new consumer home network repeater called the Universal Wi-Fi Range Extender, than what they sell the same device for in the USA.

Made in China, the new device which is designed to boost a Wi Fi signal around the home is being sold in the USA, with a recommended retail price of US $90 (A$84). The same device is being sold by Netgear in Australia for $129.

Hydrogen is a great fuel, as fuels go, and fuel cells hold tremendous promise for many uses – but I do wonder why the mass media keep on spruiking the advantages of H over EVs, even when the technology and infrastructure falls way short of the mark. Yes, it sounds great – just water out of the tailpipe, as it were – but what’s actually in it for the car industry? Why not just improve EVs?

It’s plain that no one thing will replace fossil fuels. What will probably happen is that different niches will be filled by different solutions. And on top of that we will change our behaviours over time, nudged along by availability and price. Where today we just jump in a car and expect to go at least 500km before topping the tank, tomorrow our expectation for a refuel or recharge could be somewhat less. We will adapt, as we have always done. In the medium term oil will still be around, so long trips may be performed in a traditionally-driven (or hybrid) car and shorter journeys by EV. Or EV battery technology will improve and the limitation will go away. Indeed there are so many variables – including the cost of oil – that the timescale could vary enormously. And somewhere in the mix of possible futures s is H.

You’ll note in the lengthy story at the link below that little attention is paid to the downsides of H. It’s a positive piece that puts EVs in an unchanging capability box and presses home its point about a renewed “trend” towards improving H-cars. Whilst it’s largely true, in a sense, it doesn’t give a full account either. The article glosses over the fact that it takes energy to make H, just as it takes energy to compress, store and distribute it. It doesn’t gush out of the ground like oil, it has to be made. Be that by current, energy-rich methods or by solar and biomass innovation, it still has to be made, stored and shipped around. So you are using a lot of energy just to make, umm, energy. Whilst EVs have an energy cost, too, they remove some of these penalties and make savings by simplicity, re-use of existing (but revamped) infrastructure and lower ongoing maintenance cost.

Whereas for H just about every part of the current petrol delivery system would need to be upgraded – read 100% replaced – to cope. Whilst it’s do-able it doesn’t sound cheap, either. Even after having been made it needs to be compressed into a denser, more transportable liquid form. We may be used to the idea of pipes, pumps and tanks but that doesn’t mean we wouldn’t like to be free of them, too. Let alone beefing them up to cope with compressed H.

Nevertheless H production cost (ie energy input) will definitely improve over time; but right now – and into the medium term – it still carries multiple – and crippling – energy efficiency penalties. So why do car companies – and perhaps the oil industry as well – keep on at it? Well my best theory is that it casts a “greener glow” over the industry, something they need desperately. H is also a palatable prospect in that it doesn’t change much of the scenery – the car companies keep their competitive advantages largely intact and new entrants are discouraged. Oil companies can upgrade their distribution infrastructure and offer H side-by-side with petrol. And being a (admittedly highly compressed) liquid kept in tanks we remain “familiar” and “comfortable” with the whole idea. It’s a behaviour-change minimisation strategy, in a nutshell.

So for the incumbents they basically keep things as they are. Liquid fuel burnt in an engine – that’s what they know best. They continue to build a complicated beast that needs to be fed, cooled and lubricated under a strict maintenance schedule. It will run cleaner and last longer but the whole model remains intact. Whereas an EV is a simpler alternative that needs next to no maintenance, engine-wise. The parts list is more than halved and the maintenance requirements shift mainly to battery replacement and wear and tear on the tyres, bearings and electronics. And crucially – with the high-tech combustion technology no longer required – it opens up the car game to new entrants. And why would they want that?

Not so surprising then that the incumbents want to sell H-cars. And once again the entrenched, old guard mass media just lap up the gushing press releases about H taking on EV. Well, there’s some truth there – and a heck of a lot of spin.

Electric blue | hydrogen-powered vehicles | zero emissions

Are electric cars losing their spark as hydrogen-powered vehicles make a late charge in the race to zero emissions?

The car industry’s well-publicised love affair with electric vehicles could be losing its spark before it’s properly consummated.

Much of the old guard or “mass” media engages in a dangerous game, playing along with petty politics and generally promoting the reckless and intolerant knee-jerkers over the prudent and sensible analysers. They write – and promote – what they think “sells”. They give time – too much time – to empty words said forcefully. They join with the self-interested bullies on tax, refugees and reform. And they tuck their more moderate writers away, out of sight. 

So it’s good to be able to catalogue some of the more sensible, thoughtful and balanced views that sometimes seep through the cracks….

Gittins: Critics give silent treatment when government gets tough in the budget

The reaction to last week’s budget offers a good example. On budget night every pet shop galah was complaining it wasn’t tough enough – a ”missed opportunity”, the last Julia Gillard will get before the next election.

Gittins: Critics give silent treatment when government gets tough in the budget

You get the feeling Labor cops more criticism for its slowness to roll back middle-class welfare than Howard got for putting it there ( economist Saul Eslake is the honourable exception). Certainly, the smaller-government brigade is a lot tougher on the government for its supposed timidity than it is on the opposition for its blatant populism and inconsistency.

Gittins: Carping about the budget? The record says Labor isn’t doing too badly

IF YOU listen to the economists and commentators complaining the budget wasn’t tough enough and involves budget deficits higher than earlier expected, you could easily conclude it’s a weak effort that does little to keep the economy on the right track. But you’d be misled.

Gittins: Deep cuts may inoculate against future pain

It could have been more excruciating – economists are hard to please when it comes to inflicting pain – but it’s tougher and more courageous than all but the first of the 12 budgets the now-sainted Peter Costello delivered.

Irvine: Numbers belie fear of asylum seekers

But the report notes that despite this, asylum levels in Australia remain not only below those observed in 2000 (13,100 claims) and 2001 (12,400 claims), but also below those recorded by many other industrialised and non-industrialised countries.

Indeed, Australia ranks below 13 other rich nations for the number of asylum-seeker applications lodged here. We rank even lower – 17th – for the number of applications per population.

Verrender: Hey, big spenders, it’s time to worry about all that foreign debt

The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, and his finance man, Joe Hockey, jumped all over it. And with good reason. It is an easy mark for an opposition attack, certain to stir unrest and indignation within the electorate. Unfortunately, they are picking on the wrong target.

Verrender: Hey, big spenders, it’s time to worry about all that foreign debt

The simple explanation to this conundrum is that the Treasurer was only talking about government debt, the loot he’s responsible for borrowing. At about $120 billion, it’s certainly a lot bigger than the $38 billion debt in the first year of the Rudd government. But despite the theatrics from Tony and Joe, government debt is negligible compared to the size of our economy and barely makes an impression when calculating who owes what to the rest of the world.

The real culprits in the foreign debt splurge are you and me.

Verrender: Now more than ever before do we need a sovereign wealth fund

Unfortunately, many of those now championing the sovereign fund idea let the nation down badly right at the starting post. They stood meekly by when the mining giants rode roughshod over the federal government’s plans for a resources rent tax. Many of them openly opposed the tax and then ridiculed the watered down version.

In doing so, they compromised our future, economically and politically, helping shift the power dynamic from elected officials to a triumvirate of hugely powerful but publicly unaccountable corporations.

Bravo to all. At least they have their thinking caps on and are prepared to speak their minds rather than automagically fall into line with the populists.

Love these scare stories by vested interests. Like the row over a fair and just super-profits tax on miners which was sunk by narrow self-interest at the expense of the greater community. (After all it’s OK for miners to charge whatever they like for what they dig up, but it’s apparently wrong for the actual owners of these use-once resources to charge what they want too, isn’t it? Ugh.)

Internet shopping to cost 50,000 Australian jobs in next five years – National Retail Association | News.com.au

THE surge towards internet shopping will strip Australia of about 50,000 jobs over the next five years, according to the National Retail Association.

Of course Internet shopping will change things. It already has. Face-to-face retailers have to offer something better – or at least different – in order to win a sale. Price alone won’t cut it. But in many cases they have the advantage of personal service, immediate in-stock delivery, no added freight charge and bulk-buying power – if they have set themselves up to operate in that way of course. And they can always go online themselves (although they may be 10 years late to the party.)

But 50,000 jobs? How robust is this? Was it a quick “what do ya think” ring around the mates or a careful analysis? And what about jobs gained as the Internet-based operations grow locally? Whilst not employing face-to-face retail staff they are still employing local people to maintain websites and manage the business, provide a service line and operate distribution to pack and deliver goods. It’s a boon for couriers and the postal service, too. Did they net out the gains from that nice, round 50,000 figure?  Nope, apparently not. 

Internet shopping to cost 50,000 Australian jobs in next five years – National Retail Association | News.com.au

An industry survey found about 2000 jobs had already been lost nationally because of the trend, which was sparked by the increased value of the Australian dollar. This had made buying overseas on the internet a cheaper alternative to buying goods locally.

Ah, so that 50,000 figure is actually just made up, presumably based on an ‘industry survey’ reporting 2,000 jobs ‘already…lost’. Nice to know that they didn’t waste time on careful analysis. But they have also identified the stronger Aussie dollar as the culprit. So what they are really saying is that the stimulus package that gave the retailers a leg up during the GFC is now a bad thing as it made the Aussie economy – and dollar – look comparatively stable and strong, and that the mining boom that is driving up further demand for Aussie dollars is killing us (or them, anyway). So by extension they’d have preferred a recession and a mining collapse, I guess. Bizarre.

But wait, if the stronger Aussie dollar is encouraging individuals to buy more stuff from overseas, why isn’t it helping local retailers to do the same thing? Whilst there would be a delivery lag, it’s not that the Aussie dollar has only just gotten stronger – it’s been strengthening for yonks. The big retailers especially should be reaping the benefits, buying in bulk, saving on shipping costs per item and offering better service than the local and overseas Internet e-tailers. But apparently not. Did they all make a mistake in their forward planning? Are they lumbered with old stock that they can’t afford to sell off cheaply now? Are they lazy, or logically blinded in some way?

Well maybe they should’ve managed their forward planning and stock control a bit better. (Admittedly small retailers will struggle with this but they struggle with the competition from large retail chains anyway. They have to be better and smarter in their operations just to survive.)

Internet shopping to cost 50,000 Australian jobs in next five years – National Retail Association | News.com.au

The collapse of the Borders bookstores in Australia, which cost about 1000 jobs, was blamed on the trend to online shopping.

Yeah, right. I think others have questioned that one, even if partly true.

Internet shopping to cost 50,000 Australian jobs in next five years – National Retail Association | News.com.au

Under current rules, offshore companies do not have to pay the goods and services tax or import duty on purchases of less than $1000 and Mr Black said Treasury had already estimated that would cost $460 million a year in forgone revenue.

Wow, that’s a lot of foregone revenue… but I think even Treasury would admit that the cost of recovery is greater than the money collected. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it – but it’s a bit lame to quote a figure and just leave it out there as some sort of “proof”.

Internet shopping to cost 50,000 Australian jobs in next five years – National Retail Association | News.com.au

“That’s a lot of money and it’s rapidly rising and we have a Federal Government that is asleep at the wheel on the issue,” Mr Black said.

OK, so it’s not that most of the bricks and mortar retailers have missed the boat on e-tailing, or that they haven’t leveraged their advantages or even seen what was happening with the strengthening Aussie dollar, it’s just that the Feds are asleep, even when it’s been referred to the Productivity Commission. Apparently after 10 years or more of total blind ignorance it’s suddenly an urgent issue. Yeah, right. I’m convinced.  

Internet shopping to cost 50,000 Australian jobs in next five years – National Retail Association | News.com.au

“When you see the trends, the 50,000 jobs is not an extravagant claim.

“The community will feel this. A lot of kids get their start in retail and it will be the mums who do a few hours work and the kids working after school who will feel it.”

If all else fails make an emotional plea to save the jobs of the mums and kids. That’ll work.

This otherwise innocuous travel article really sums it up for me, plainly illustrating the corrupt interconnection between traditional mass media and its self-serving, uncritical promotion of mass consumption. Yeah, OK, I’m on my soapbox again, but hear me out.

It’s blindingly obvious that travel writers will promote travel, and in that simple way thus promote themselves and their livelihood. On the surface that’s fine – it’s how the world turns after all – but for the fact that it’s rarely a balanced account, rather it is simply a gushing, glowing encouragement to consume. In this example it’s along the lines of ‘let’s keep air travel cheap, perhaps stupidly cheap’ and never go back. Now travel can be useful, wonderful and enlightening or just another tick-in-the-box consumerist urge. What keeps it in check – and provides a balance – is price coupled with convenience, or a lack of it. Bigger planes and terminals and less service helps cut the seat cost, and the convenience factor is often pretty well equal across all airlines. So price usually wins the day, especially if you shop online. But if we simply drive down the price for the sole purpose of increasing consumption we are really just removing a natural barrier to over-use of our finite resources. After all, if we all did it we’d have the cheapest air fares imaginable, but the maximum degradation of our planet. Is that ultimately good for tourism?

Which is not to say that we should return to elitist super-high-price air travel as we want fair access for the maximum number of people. But we also want to strike a fair balance between cost, access and resource use across the greater economy. To me current super-cheap airfares don’t look realistic or sustainable. I suspect that we have subsidised air travel infrastructure and simultaneously run down alternatives like rail to artificially make Aussie air travel look and feel a bit like the US air travel market but less volatile. But in so doing we are also not recouping the real environmental cost of air travel. At some point – probably quite soon – there will be a reaction where hidden subsidies will fall and real costs will rise. Even if you just looked at aviation jet fuel prices alone it’s obvious that prices will rise.   

That’s my viewpoint – but what does this SMH travel writer suggest?

Australian airlines | Who are we flying with? | Travellers’ Check

There was a time in the 1990s when flying was a choice between tweedledum and tweedledee – two of the most expensive, non-competitive airlines in the developed word. The cheapest return air fare between Melbourne and Sydney was $239 and, if you travelled at the witching hour on Wednesday night you might be able to get a return ticket to Perth for under $500 if you booked a month ahead.

Now let’s look at this statement for a moment. Set aside the issue of a lack of competition – something that really goes waaay back to the earlier and long-standing 2-airlines policy rather than simply the 1990s – and look at those fares: $239 return between 2 cities some 800km apart by air. Or $500 to get right across the continent. And ask what would be a fair price to shift yourself and some luggage that distance. Compare it with driving or rail or even riding a push bike if you like. Those prices don’t sound that unrealistic to me, especially given the convenience and time saved. In fact those prices look and feel quite sustainable, even if we imposed greater charges on the airlines to more fully recover public infrastructure, air navigation and safety bureaucracy costs (it’s not just airport infrastructure after all). If you see those prices as too high, what would be a fair price?

Australian airlines | Who are we flying with? | Travellers’ Check

In 2011, I have to say, it’s difficult to imagine that loathsome travel era returning. There’s now a choice of no fewer than seven niche and mainline brands providing full-service for both holiday and business travel and no-frills low-cost right across domestic and international networks.

Now the SMH travel writer has a far different view to mine, clearly. That high-cost era is, to him, not just more expensive but actually quite “loathsome”. Quite a powerful word to use in this context. Of course we are better off with more competition and we don’t want to return to the 1990s per se but perhaps – given peak oil and a growing user-pays mentality – a reality check is in order as well.

Australian airlines | Who are we flying with? | Travellers’ Check

Clive Dorman is one of Australia’s most experienced travel journalists.

Apparently so.

Worth a read…. although personally I don’t think you can so easily – so glibly – stratify society into common viewpoints, it’s far more complex and interwoven than that suggests. I don’t see some sort of unintelligent scum floating on top of a civilised, informed society, for example.

Nor can I support the idea of labelling people by profession – even politicians – via simplistic one liners (‘professional liars’, etc). Tempting though that may be.

Nor can I ignore the intransigent old media that in many ways still runs the show. It’s too easy to overlook the split and conflicting roles of the paid media, as neutral documenter of a changing society via such things as births, deaths, marriages and raw, unbiased reporting on one hand and as an active participant in the mass marketing of products, ideas and opinion on the other. It’s this deep, dark and ultimately corrupt conflict between simply reporting the facts and actually publishing what sells that so often distorts our received view.

We may know (say) 10 people really well and tap into the views of 25 or more in our daily lives, but we are presented at the flick of a switch or turn of the page with the sensational, distorted accounts of thousands more in the wider media. These dire, desperate views of vested and ill-informed interests are presented with little indication of scale or perspective; indeed the more dire and desperate the better in many cases.

By looking only at the old media we cannot really know what people are thinking. We have to bypass the vested interests – not just the mining companies or clubs or whatever but the media itself – and go and speak with the greater community to do that.

Clubs Launch Anti-Pokies Restrictions Campaign

That’s why I’m thinking Clubs Australia may be right, in its pro-pokie campaign. Maybe it is un-Australian to oppose a regime that has always sought the little guy’s blessing to thieve from the poor and give to the rich. Less lions led by donkeys than galahs led by wombats.

I know, I know, English is a changing language and everday use has morphed over the last few decades. Even so I expect better from the so-called “quality” media. Personally I (just about) gave up fighting against this spurious, lazy use of ‘acronym’ for any abbreviation some time ago. It’s a battle (seemingly) lost. But – hesitatingly – once more into the breach dear friends…

SMH please note: QANTAS is both an abbreviation and – because it’s actually said as a fully-fledged word – an acronym as well. Whereas OMG is just an abbreviation or initialism (unless you somehow say “ommmguh” or similar). Is it too late to fight this? 

The Offender – the Sydney Morning Herald:
OMG, acronym fever sends a text to the OED

OMG, acronym fever sends a text to the OED

What Acronym actually means:
Acronym | Define Acronym at Dictionary.com

a pronounceable name made up of a series of initial letters or parts of words; for example, UNESCO for the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

What is acronym? – A Word Definition From the Webopedia Computer Dictionary

In everyday speech, the term is also used to refer to initialisms, which are combinations of letters representing a longer phrase. For example, CRT is an initialism for cathode ray tube. The difference is that an acronym is pronounced as if it were a word rather than just a series of individual letters.

I love this stuff, but it’s next to useless. A lot of people will put a lot of faith and money into it and follow it all the way up the garden path. And if it’s a broad enough path they’ll make some bucks. Perhaps big bucks. Starbucks in this example. So why is it next to useless? Well firstly the “analysis” is only as good as the data in and the parameters set. For example whilst it’s good that twitter profiles are filtered and partials dropped, how strongly correlated to “fact” are these profiles? Do we even know? How broad is the twitter “church” anyway? Or, if you like, how representative and meaningful is it across the 3 years of data?

And the reference tweets themselves – what analysis has been done to uncover their “real” meaning? Does the mere mention of a target word register as a positive in every case or is some measure taken to rate it within context? (It may be part of a blisteringly negative comment – so have we looked for negative keywords as well and tied them to the target words? How do we recognise and scale negativity, or sarcasm, or pure wit? Do we bother?) Of course you can fix all – or at least most – of this, but it takes time and money.

And even then, what does it tell us that we couldn’t have figured out from customer surveys and sales trend data? Can it really be used to detect underlying sentiment and predict behaviour? I guess we need to correlate this work against all of the other work to “prove” its value. Wonderful, more money in the pockets of the analysts amongst us. 

But it looks great. And it will get better as it becomes more understood. 

Blog – PeopleBrowsr

ReSearch.ly visualizes the interest graph, and also provides the ability to search within the search to sort activity by demographics and psychographics, sentiment, bio data, profession, and the list goes on. Essentially, it’s a product that anyone can use to learn about what’s really taking place on Twitter to better understand behavior and earn greater relevance by making more informed decisions.

As an example of audience profiling or competitive intelligence, we used ReSearch.ly to review the followers of @Starbucks, one of the most celebrated brands actively using Twitter today. We started by extracting 1 million follower profiles, sorted by follower count. The results were then further filtered to include only those who published a complete profile. ReSearch.ly provides the option to then organize the resulting information any number of ways, which in this case, we sorted the accounts by bio, location, and gender.

There’s no fighting these people, is there? Everything has to be blamed on someone else, nothing is ever attributable to themselves or their own beliefs. Or even left as “nature” simply doing its thing. No, it’s the “warmists” who did this.

Armed with their own unerring personal self-belief, climate change deniers can turn any weather event into an irrational argument of support for “doing nothing“, even when actually arguing that “something should have been done”. As in something should have been done to prepare for flooding but for those rotten “warmists” getting in the way and leading us astray.

Except the deniers don’t actually propose to do anything since – after all – it’s not happening, anyway.

Indeed when a singularly major flood event occurs in Queensland it can be simply and quickly blamed on a non-existent state “prime minister” (I think he meant ‘Premier’) who was somehow blinded by the Greenies to believe that “non-existent” anthropogenic climate change means only drought, and never flooding rains. Well that’s a surprise, since almost everything I read about the warming climate suggests more volatility, ie bigger variations and – gosh – maybe even flooding rains as well as drought.

It really is appalling reading, but read on anyway…

What was the role of warmists in the Queensland flood disaster? – Telegraph

Ever more alarming facts are emerging to show how Brisbane’s floods were made infinitely worse by cockeyed decisions inspired by the obsession of the Australian authorities with global warming. Inevitably, the country’s warmist lobby has been voluble in claiming that such a “freak weather event” (as the BBC called it) is a consequence of man-made climate change. But far from being an unprecedented “freak event”, the latest flood was nearly a foot below the level of one in 1974 and 10 feet below the record set in 1893.

Hmmm, don’t want to turn you off massages but the original research here doesn’t back up everything that is claimed in the NYT; which is not unusual for media reporting in general, is it? As always, beware media and blogger hype!

The danger signs here are over-simplification and exaggeration. Par for the course, I know. There is no hint that the results are complex or contradictory, only the seemingly unequivocal “good news” that massage is potentially a “medical necessity”, at least in the words of the blogger quoted. Contrast the “good news” for massage message with the original source report that states in its conclusion, “preliminary data suggest that a single session of Swedish Massage Therapy produces measurable biologic effects. If replicated, these findings may have implications for managing inflammatory and autoimmune conditions.” As you’d hope it is a measured, careful statement of just “biologic effects”, not convincing evidence of positive benefits.

So what is “the truth”? First up, read the report itself. (Note: I didn’t spend $49 getting the full paper, I just used the abstract. If you really want the full story, buy the full research report.) Nevertheless, if you want my opinion, read on…
 
Firstly the Swedish massage was only compared to “light touch” as a control, there was apparently no comparison with rest or alternatively light activity.  So what it “proves” is limited to either a full-on Swedish massage or “light touch” – whether just resting is better or even different is unknown. It needs to be widened in scope and the result replicated, as the conclusion stated, before valid conclusions are drawn.

Secondly the Swedish massage caused “a large effect size decrease in AVP”, which is to say that vasopressin levels dropped. Vasopressin essentially helps us to conserve water and avoid dehydration. It conserves water by concentrating our urine and as a by-product raises blood pressure, all good things whilst normal, healthy people are exercising. Assuming that you have just finished exercising and are no longer concerned with conserving urine then this is ‘probably’ a good thing, but be aware that it will potentially accelerate dehydration. Drink before, during and after massage, perhaps? It’s worth noting also that vasopressin appears to be linked also with pair bonding, so reduced AVP levels would presumably be a disincentive for massage if the formation of long-term attachments is important to you. “Massage destroys long-term relationships” is a headline the NYT missed!

It has also got to be asked if you just stop exercising and replenish your fluids in the normal way will your AVP levels fall anyway? Of course they will. Not sure if the researchers filtered out those who had just exercised or not, categorised them or even considered that AVP levels may have been falling anyway, irrespective. If they didn’t, or didn’t correct for differing levels of exercise exertion then they should have.

Thirdly there is a reported “small effect size decrease in CORT, but these findings were not mediated by OT.” So Swedish massage may have a small role in decreasing cortisol levels when compared with “light touch” but that any such small difference is not linked with oxytocin release, which was the massage industry’s hope. Again, cortisol falls anyway when the stimulus (stressor) is removed or reduced. Rest does that, too, but here we see a “small difference” between full-on massage and light touch. What would rest or sleep do in comparison? 

Fourthly “massage increased the number of circulating lymphocytes, CD 25+ lymphocytes, CD 56+ lymphocytes, CD4+lymphocytes, and CD8+ lymphocytes (effect sizes from 0.14 to 0.43).” Again, this needs to be corrected for pre-massage exercise levels as well as compared with a valid control. (I haven’t got the full report so I can’t be certain.) This is important – indeed crucial – to the “increased immune response” claim. It’s also probably something that those with auto-immune diseases probably don’t want, too. Increased immune response, no thanks. 

Fifthly, “mitogen-stimulated levels of interleukin (IL)–1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, IL-13, and IFN-γ decreased for subjects receiving Swedish Massage Therapy versus light touch (effect sizes from −0.22 to −0.63). Swedish Massage Therapy decreased IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13 levels relative to baseline measures.” Decreased? OK, it gets a bit confused or contradictory here as decreased interleukin levels suggest less communication, coordination and stimulation of the immune response. So if we can unravel the seeming contradiction – increased immune response despite lower levels of immune stimulation – this could be good news for those with auto-immune diseases. For the rest of us it doesn’t stand out as a plus for massage. It does stand in seeming contradiction with point four above and needs to be explored.

So whilst it’s intriguing news it’s not actually a full-on endorsement of massage, either. Beware media spin (even mine), it can lead you astray! 

Is Massage a Medical Necessity? | The Outside Blog

Researchers at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles recruited a group of 53 healthy adults to get massages. Some got a Swedish massage and the rest got a light massage. All of the adults had their blood tested before and just after their massage. The results?

The Swedish massage group experienced significantly lower levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, and an increase in their immune systems’ disease-fighting white blood cells. The light massage group also experienced increases in oxytocin, the contentment hormone, and decreases in the hormone that triggers the release of cortisol.

If a massage seems like an expensive way to fight off stress and disease, consider looking up massage colleges in your area, where hour-long massages by masseurs-in-training often cost $25-$30–half the cost of a massage at a spa.

Vital Signs – A Good Massage Brings Biological Changes, Too – NYTimes.com

Volunteers who received Swedish massage experienced significant decreases in levels of the stress hormone cortisol in blood and saliva, and in arginine vasopressin, a hormone that can lead to increases in cortisol. They also had increases in the number of lymphocytes, white blood cells that are part of the immune system.

Volunteers who had the light massage experienced greater increases in oxytocin, a hormone associated with contentment, than the Swedish massage group, and bigger decreases in adrenal corticotropin hormone, which stimulates the adrenal glands to release cortisol.

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. – The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine – 0(0):

Results: Compared to light touch, Swedish Massage Therapy caused a large effect size decrease in AVP, and a small effect size decrease in CORT, but these findings were not mediated by OT. Massage increased the number of circulating lymphocytes, CD 25+ lymphocytes, CD 56+ lymphocytes, CD4+lymphocytes, and CD8+ lymphocytes (effect sizes from 0.14 to 0.43). Mitogen-stimulated levels of interleukin (IL)–1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, IL-13, and IFN-γ decreased for subjects receiving Swedish Massage Therapy versus light touch (effect sizes from −0.22 to −0.63). Swedish Massage Therapy decreased IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13 levels relative to baseline measures.

Hmmm, don’t want to turn you off massages but the original research here doesn’t back up everything that is claimed in the NYT; which is not unusual for media reporting in general, is it? As always, beware media and blogger hype!

The danger signs here are over-simplification and exaggeration. Par for the course, I know. There is no hint that the results are complex or contradictory, only the seemingly unequivocal “good news” that massage is potentially a “medical necessity”, at least in the words of the blogger quoted. Contrast the “good news” for massage message with the original source report that states in its conclusion, “preliminary data suggest that a single session of Swedish Massage Therapy produces measurable biologic effects. If replicated, these findings may have implications for managing inflammatory and autoimmune conditions.” As you’d hope it is a measured, careful statement of just “biologic effects”, not convincing evidence of positive benefits.

So what is “the truth”? First up, read the report itself. (Note: I didn’t spend $49 getting the full paper, I just used the abstract. If you really want the full story, buy the full research report.) Nevertheless, if you want my opinion, read on…
 
Firstly the Swedish massage was only compared to “light touch” as a control, there was apparently no comparison with rest or alternatively light activity.  So what it “proves” is limited to either a full-on Swedish massage or “light touch” – whether just resting is better or even different is unknown. It needs to be widened in scope and the result replicated, as the conclusion stated, before valid conclusions are drawn.

Secondly the Swedish massage caused “a large effect size decrease in AVP”, which is to say that vasopressin levels dropped. Vasopressin essentially helps us to conserve water and avoid dehydration. It conserves water by concentrating our urine and as a by-product raises blood pressure, all good things whilst normal, healthy people are exercising. Assuming that you have just finished exercising and are no longer concerned with conserving urine then this is ‘probably’ a good thing, but be aware that it will potentially accelerate dehydration. Drink before, during and after massage, perhaps? It’s worth noting also that vasopressin appears to be linked also with pair bonding, so reduced AVP levels would presumably be a disincentive for massage if the formation of long-term attachments is important to you. “Massage destroys long-term relationships” is a headline the NYT missed!

It has also got to be asked if you just stop exercising and replenish your fluids in the normal way will your AVP levels fall anyway? Of course they will. Not sure if the researchers filtered out those who had just exercised or not, categorised them or even considered that AVP levels may have been falling anyway, irrespective. If they didn’t, or didn’t correct for differing levels of exercise exertion then they should have.

Thirdly there is a reported “small effect size decrease in CORT, but these findings were not mediated by OT.” So Swedish massage may have a small role in decreasing cortisol levels when compared with “light touch” but that any such small difference is not linked with oxytocin release, which was the massage industry’s hope. Again, cortisol falls anyway when the stimulus (stressor) is removed or reduced. Rest does that, too, but here we see a “small difference” between full-on massage and light touch. What would rest or sleep do in comparison? 

Fourthly “massage increased the number of circulating lymphocytes, CD 25+ lymphocytes, CD 56+ lymphocytes, CD4+lymphocytes, and CD8+ lymphocytes (effect sizes from 0.14 to 0.43).” Again, this needs to be corrected for pre-massage exercise levels as well as compared with a valid control. (I haven’t got the full report so I can’t be certain.) This is important – indeed crucial – to the “increased immune response” claim. It’s also probably something that those with auto-immune diseases probably don’t want, too. Increased immune response, no thanks. 

Fifthly, “mitogen-stimulated levels of interleukin (IL)–1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, IL-13, and IFN-γ decreased for subjects receiving Swedish Massage Therapy versus light touch (effect sizes from −0.22 to −0.63). Swedish Massage Therapy decreased IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13 levels relative to baseline measures.” Decreased? OK, it gets a bit confused or contradictory here as decreased interleukin levels suggest less communication, coordination and stimulation of the immune response. So if we can unravel the seeming contradiction – increased immune response despite lower levels of immune stimulation – this could be good news for those with auto-immune diseases. For the rest of us it doesn’t stand out as a plus for massage. It does stand in seeming contradiction with point four above and needs to be explored.

So whilst it’s intriguing news it’s not actually a full-on endorsement of massage, either. Beware media spin (even mine), it can lead you astray! 

Is Massage a Medical Necessity? | The Outside Blog

Researchers at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles recruited a group of 53 healthy adults to get massages. Some got a Swedish massage and the rest got a light massage. All of the adults had their blood tested before and just after their massage. The results?

The Swedish massage group experienced significantly lower levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, and an increase in their immune systems’ disease-fighting white blood cells. The light massage group also experienced increases in oxytocin, the contentment hormone, and decreases in the hormone that triggers the release of cortisol.

If a massage seems like an expensive way to fight off stress and disease, consider looking up massage colleges in your area, where hour-long massages by masseurs-in-training often cost $25-$30–half the cost of a massage at a spa.

Vital Signs – A Good Massage Brings Biological Changes, Too – NYTimes.com

Volunteers who received Swedish massage experienced significant decreases in levels of the stress hormone cortisol in blood and saliva, and in arginine vasopressin, a hormone that can lead to increases in cortisol. They also had increases in the number of lymphocytes, white blood cells that are part of the immune system.

Volunteers who had the light massage experienced greater increases in oxytocin, a hormone associated with contentment, than the Swedish massage group, and bigger decreases in adrenal corticotropin hormone, which stimulates the adrenal glands to release cortisol.

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. – The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine – 0(0):

Results: Compared to light touch, Swedish Massage Therapy caused a large effect size decrease in AVP, and a small effect size decrease in CORT, but these findings were not mediated by OT. Massage increased the number of circulating lymphocytes, CD 25+ lymphocytes, CD 56+ lymphocytes, CD4+lymphocytes, and CD8+ lymphocytes (effect sizes from 0.14 to 0.43). Mitogen-stimulated levels of interleukin (IL)–1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, IL-13, and IFN-γ decreased for subjects receiving Swedish Massage Therapy versus light touch (effect sizes from −0.22 to −0.63). Swedish Massage Therapy decreased IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13 levels relative to baseline measures.

They may think this ‘invisible fuselage’ idea is cool and demonstrates their creativity, but I suspect more than a few travellers wouldn’t want the fuselage to suddenly vanish beneath their feet (or above their heads for that matter). As a party trick on a sightseeing flight, maybe it makes sense. Maybe. On a scheduled passenger flight? Hmmm, looks like a long way doooowwwwn. Ugh. It does demonstrate that the designers are off their heads, though, and that Airbus marketing needs to rethink what they release to the media.

Airbus to build invisible passenger plane | News.com.au

The extraordinary design would allow travellers to look down on cities and landscapes thousands of feet below or gaze up at the heavens, giving them the sensation of floating unassisted through the sky.

They may think this ‘invisible fuselage’ idea is cool and demonstrates their creativity, but I suspect more than a few travellers wouldn’t want the fuselage to suddenly vanish beneath their feet (or above their heads for that matter). As a party trick on a sightseeing flight, maybe it makes sense. Maybe. On a scheduled passenger flight? Hmmm, looks like a long way doooowwwwn. Ugh. It does demonstrate that the designers are off their heads, though, and that Airbus marketing needs to rethink what they release to the media.

Airbus to build invisible passenger plane | News.com.au

The extraordinary design would allow travellers to look down on cities and landscapes thousands of feet below or gaze up at the heavens, giving them the sensation of floating unassisted through the sky.