2010 Ig Nobel Winners Announced 111
Velcroman1 writes "Having trouble breathing? Try riding a roller-coaster. Really. A pair of Dutch researchers who discovered that the symptoms of asthma can be treated with a roller-coaster ride are among this year's winners of the Ig Nobel awards, the infamous annual tribute to scientific research that seems wacky — but also has real world applications. FoxNews.com has interviews with several award winners, who are all ecstatic to win, despite the fact that they're all gently being poked fun at."
Last prize really Ig Nobel? (Score:5, Insightful)
And finally, a project at the University of Catania in Italy was awarded the management prize for demonstrating mathematically that organizations can improve efficiency by promoting people randomly.
This research deserves a far better prize than the Ig Nobel. Just look at the management in companies! An algorithm far worse than random is being used to select the worst of the worst to run companies.
I believe most institutions run in spite of management.
And don't mod this funny.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Last prize really Ig Nobel? (Score:5, Insightful)
From their site: "The Ig Nobel Prizes honor achievements that first make people laugh, and then make them think. The prizes are intended to celebrate the unusual, honor the imaginative -- and spur people's interest in science, medicine, and technology." Certainly fits; contrary to what many people think it's not about "stupid" research. After all, the prizes "are physically handed out by genuinely bemused Nobel laureates" - would perceiving the whole thing only as harmless fun be enough to get them so easily aboard?
PS. Also, you jump too quickly to conclusions - the effect might as well be, for example, that when people know the promotions will be random, they don't care too much / there's no infighting / the random ones aren't worse enough (but with other positive effects it pays off) / etc.
Re:Last prize really Ig Nobel? (Score:5, Informative)
Having trouble breathing? Try riding a roller-coaster. Really. A pair of Dutch researchers who discovered that the symptoms of asthma can be treated with a roller-coaster ride...
Most asthmatics know that the emergency treatment for severe attacks is a shot of adrenaline. A ride on a rollercoaster is also kinda a shot of adrenaline. I suppose holding a loaded gun to one's head may also alleviate symptoms.
Kinda like that Simpsons episode where Bart has all this stuff super-glued to his face, and Dr. Hibert breaks out a menacing-looking nailgun to remove them. Bart simply sweats them off as Dr. Hibert laughs. Bart asks why Dr. Hibert couldnt've just turned up the thermostat, and Dr. Hibert responds evilly,
No, it had to be terror sweat!
Re: (Score:2)
It's called the "Goonies" effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It was a button applicator!
Or something to that extent.
Why do I remember that?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What? That's not true at all.
Antihistamines work exactly as their name implies -- they block the histamine response that causes inflammation, etc. They do not increase adrenaline levels.
I drink less... (Score:2)
"Students drink more during the weekends".
Being able to sleep in more often, I don't have to overcaffeinate myself, and I'm not riding my bicycle out to campus, so less sipping form an oversized water bottle...oh, you meant alcohol? Don't drink more of that either. 0 = 0. [still 21. :(]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder about anaphylactic shock. Would naturally produced adrenaline work at least as a palliative until proper medical treatment can be provided? I wonder what the judge would say if one was to water-board a person suffering anaphylactic shock though.
My kid carries an epi-pen, which led to this story from one of my friends. One day he was hanging out with a girl who was allergic to bee stings. Of course, she got stung, and he tried to help her out with the epi-pen. Unfortunately, he was holding the pen backwards, with his thumb over the end, and when he pushed it into her thigh, it stabbed his finger. The needle is spring-loaded, and reasonably forceful, so it went right in, hit the bone, and curled into a hook. Now he has to pull this thing out, a
Re: (Score:2)
Epinepherine *is* also known as adrenaline, so this makes sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Is bemused [onelook.com] the right word here? It isn't synonymous with "amused". (Sorry for the pedantry, but I am the penultimate prescriptivist.)
Re: (Score:2)
physically handed out by genuinely bemused Nobel laureates
Is bemused [onelook.com] the right word here? It isn't synonymous with "amused". (Sorry for the pedantry, but I am the penultimate prescriptivist.)
Does that make me the ultimate prescriptivist? Follow your own link or try this one: http://www.google.com/dictionary?q=bemuse&langpair=en|en [google.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I have long advocated sortition (choosing positions in government through lottery).
It appears now there is some research to justify this.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if it "works" it seems to be a significantly different thing - a random promotion of one position "up" within the same organisation isn't similar at all to an outright lottery for arguably one of the most crucial (unless everything would be really handed by backstage clerks anyway) positions in a given country.
Re:Last prize really Ig Nobel? (Score:4, Insightful)
Ig Nobels are not really an insult. They CAN be, but they aren't necessarily.
Re: (Score:1)
Too bad I don't have mod points, I did find the end of the post funny :)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Like the old saying goes: Those that can, do; Those that can't are promoted to management" Of course, then there is the old saying that "You only get promoted to the level of your incompetency"
A randomized promotion system would tend to push the real workers, the ones who make things happen, into positions where they can affect change.
Re: (Score:2)
Effect. You fail at management speak.
Re: (Score:2)
A randomized promotion system would tend to push the real workers, the ones who make things happen, into positions where they can affect change.
Effect. You fail at management speak.
That rather depends on what the OP actually meant. A manager can certainly effect changes, but he/she can also affect changes.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Just got done reading The Peter Principle (http://www.amazon.com/Peter-Principle-Laurence-J/dp/1568491611), so this looks like a dangerously accurate theory.
Re: (Score:2)
I once had a manager tell me the Peter Principle was company policy. He didn't use the same words, and didn't call it the Peter Principle, but the meaning was dead on.
That was not a good place to work.
Re:Last prize really Ig Nobel? (Score:5, Interesting)
OTOH that's terribly depressing, if a validation of the general observation about management practices.
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds like they have mathematical demonstration of the Peter principle. This is where "in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to their level of incompetence".
Re: (Score:2)
And finally, a project at the University of Catania in Italy was awarded the management prize for demonstrating mathematically that organizations can improve efficiency by promoting people randomly.
This research deserves a far better prize than the Ig Nobel. Just look at the management in companies! An algorithm far worse than random is being used to select the worst of the worst to run companies.
I believe most institutions run in spite of management.
And don't mod this funny.
That doesn't actually hugely surprise me. At least one well-known jobhunting book claims that companies get just as good results choosing new staff by pulling names out of a hat as they do through the traditional application/interview process, and I first read that in around 2002.
Re:Last prize really Ig Nobel? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The only way this "scientific" paper could have been given a prize is because it rubs people's preconceived notions the right way: the grand-parent post is living proof of this. But scientifically, it's absolutely worthless.
Here is the paper in a nutshell: if you operate under the crazy assumption that the competence of someone has absolutely NO IMPACT WHATSOEVER on how well they will do their job when they get promoted to a higher level, then it makes no sense to promote skilled people since they won't do
Surely you jest? (Score:2)
No, I'm serious. And don' call me Shirley!
Re: (Score:2)
That's because its about who you know, who you went to school with, which buddy is on your board, which board your buddy wants you on and what back room deals you can swap with each other to make each of you look good; in the short term. And once you look good, you all get together for a circle jerk to give each other a raise.
Most companies today are led by people whos sole desire is to see how much they can legally plunder - even while they are sinking the ship they plunder. But, what do you expect when li
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to put it like it's something new?...
(in fact, I'd say there's certainly less of such stuff going on than was the case "historically"; still too much of course)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if the same principle would apply to government. Let's start assigning random people to public office and see if that helps.
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, in "good ol' times" - 2006-2007, 95% of the investment funds in Poland recorded lower profits (or even loses) than average for all possible random baskets of 20 stocks. And journalist who discovered it found also, that his toddler had better results in picking stocks than fund managers :-)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
An algorithm far worse than random is being used to select the worst of the worst to run companies.
Self-selection.
Obviously, the best solution is to promote people who don't WANT to be promoted. And hope that doesn't make them quit. I know at least one ex-boss of mine had to be almost forcibly crowbarred into management, and did a brilliant job. Of course, I turned down a lot of promotion opportunities myself because being responsible for other people's screwups would have put me in a rubber room in sh
Asthma is cured while you are on a roller coaster (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Asthma is cured while you are on a roller coast (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
More flags, more tidal volume!
Woah missread (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Why would the name of a company that is universally written as LG (note the CAPITAL letters) suddenly show up as lg (lowercase)? Even slashdot isn't that sloppy. Don't be an idiot.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Even slashdot isn't that sloppy. Don't be an idiot.
You must be new here, Mr. Coward.
Re:Woah missread (Score:4, Interesting)
1: If you haven't heard about the Ig Nobel prize before now, I wonder where you've been. I'm pretty sure that most slashdotters can list more Ig Nobel winning research than Alfred Nobel winning research. On the geek scale, Ig Nobel ranks up there with Darwin awards, knowing Binky's colour and the 20th decimal of pi.
2: Not everyone uses a font where I and l look similar. In fact, programmers, sysadmins and other computer geeks tend to abhor fonts with ambiguity. If you can't tell an Omelet from an 0rneIet, you need to change your font NOW.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
You'll take my courier from my cold, dead hands
Re: (Score:2)
But I and I are identical, as are l and l, not just similar, so I don't see what you're getting at.
Re: (Score:1)
And what is it exactly "Ig"? I first thought it was "1g" (one gramm; a small nobel statue in gold).
Re: (Score:2)
It's a pun on "ignoble."
Re: (Score:2)
My favorite one (Score:1)
I am surprised to hear (Score:1)
That they let you out.
Surprised and worried.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Now that's funny.
However, I will never be able to watch Batman again.
Re: (Score:2)
But make sure any collectors and users of bat guano get to see it.
Socks (Score:5, Informative)
"In research that could boost the sales of socks in New England, a study out of the University of Otago in New Zealand found that wearing socks over shoes results in far fewer slips and falls on icy footpaths. It won the physics prize."
This is common knowledge here amongst yachties and other people who walk on green covered slipways (they're not called that for nothing). Put on some rugby socks and you won't fall over. It's counter-intuitive but it works.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
The role of science has always been either to experiment on what everybody knows or on what nobody ever guessed.
And hey, now your common knowledge is backed up by a scientific study meaning people can't call it anecdotal anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not even counter-intuitive, at least, not to me. In the Navy, decks topside are painted with something called "non-skid," a mixture of paint and sand. (Five gallons of the stuff have only two gallons of liquid; the rest is pigment and sand.) You'd think that this would be enough to keep people from slipping on wet decks, but I can assure you from personal experience that it's not always! Of course, the deck was not only wet, it was moving when I lost my footin
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively, wear shoes with grippy (profiled rubber) soles instead of stupid leather soles.
Re: (Score:2)
"In research that could boost the sales of socks in New England, a study out of the University of Otago in New Zealand found that wearing socks over shoes results in far fewer slips and falls on icy footpaths. It won the physics prize."
This is common knowledge here amongst yachties and other people who walk on green covered slipways (they're not called that for nothing). Put on some rugby socks and you won't fall over. It's counter-intuitive but it works.
Counter-intuitive? It seemed very intuitive to me. But I can't find socks to fit my big feet. Good luck finding ones to go over my shoes.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that this has been known for probably most of his life, if not longer, why are they getting an award for restating something that is known?
One common reply to this is that it used to be "known" that non-white people are sub-human. That didn't make it true.
To use a less emotional topic it is "known" by many that tapping cans of carbonated beverage before opening will make them not explode. I seem to recall someone looking into this and finding that waiting for the same amount of time as the tapping would take had the same effect.
Basically, it comes down to this: scientific knowledge and scientific trial and error aren't the same as common knowl
Another myth busted (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Darn shame I don't have any mod points right now, you would certainly be getting one.
Re: (Score:1)
Slime Molds (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm glad to see the use of slime molds to study transport networks on there.
I honestly thought it was one of the most interesting bits of research I'd seen all year.
Re:Slime Molds (Score:5, Funny)
I'm glad to see the use of slime molds to study transport networks on there.
Sounds like an ideal model for Melbourne drivers.
Slime Molds and Traffic (Score:3, Funny)
DC, too -- being stuck on 395 at rush hour sure makes a slime mold look like a speed demon.
Cheers,
Re: (Score:2)
It is interesting, but I always thought that slime molds were just randomly generated. Of course, I would still like to see them used to trace a path for a railway through the Dungeons of Doom.
Re: (Score:1)
I always thought slime molds were just randomly promoted managers.
...they're all gently being poked fun at (Score:1)
The site itself (Score:3, Informative)
So here it is [nyud.net] although via Corel Cache since the site appears to be taking quite a heavy hit.
I think I'm probably the first to try via corel cache so its still loading for me, but I hope giving this link will improve that...
Mystery solved (Score:2)
I was there, and as we left the place there were people handing out small packages of red Swedish fish. So the mystery is solved(?)
The winners are... (Score:1)
MEDICINE PRIZE: for discovering that symptoms of asthma can be treated with a roller-coaster ride.
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PRIZE: for using slime mold to determine the optimal routes for railroad tracks.
PHYSICS PRIZE: for demonstrating that, on icy footpaths in wintertime, people slip and fall less often if they wear socks on the outside of their shoes.
PEACE PRIZE: for confirming the widely held be
Awesome! (Score:1)
Once we get FDA Approval for the use of roller coasters to treat asthma, I will look forward to forcing my insurance company to build one for me in my back yard. YAY!
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Wrong! Only if it has been spun like a roller coaster.
guh? (Score:2)
does it annoy you so much that nobody actually *is* flaming fox that you have to play with sock puppets...?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a tautology. All truth is liberal.
Unless free from prejudice and narrow-mindedness, i.e. liberal, it can't progress from an opinion or a belief to the independent verification that truth survives.
Re:Fox News! Burn it! Burn it with fire! (Score:4, Insightful)
Indeed -- no group has monopoly on narrow-mindedness; there is just a higher proportion of liberals among progressives than many other groups, but each individual progressive can be as close minded and prejudiced as a trailer park reverend.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Unless free from prejudice and narrow-mindedness, i.e. liberal,
Like when conservatives get shouted down [examiner.com] whenever they are to speak at college campuses? Like how brown^H^H^H purple shirted SEIU [sweetness-light.com] thugs lock out anyone with an opposing view, sometimes using violence? that kind of "free from prejudice and narrow-mindedness"?
Sorry, but liberals are no longer the ones with open minds, willing to listen to all opinions and give them a fair shot and even consider foreign ideas in their own minds. Those true liberals got shouted down and mashed under the thumb of "progressive
Re: (Score:1)
That's a tautology. All truth is liberal.
To the contrary, by your definition of "liberal", no truth is liberal.
For instance, "1x1=1" is pretty narrow-minded. In fact, for most people who support that statement, it's not even up to debate. Liberal implies that everything is subjective, hence the "open-mindedness". Truth, by it's very nature must be objective. Therefore, while any statement may be accepted by a liberal thinker, to hold it as truth is to betray liberality.
Open-mindedness is great for creating art and brainstorming. However, narrow-mi
Re: (Score:2)
That's quite an impressive straw man you've built there. And I'm in awe of the ferocity you display in tearing it down. You must be very proud of yourself.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fox News! Burn it! Burn it with fire! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Fox News! Burn it! Burn it with fire! (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, there is an error in the Fox News article. Here is a quote from the official site instead:
ECONOMICS PRIZE: The executives and directors of Goldman Sachs, AIG, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Magnetar for creating and promoting new ways to invest money -- ways that maximize financial gain and minimize financial risk for the world economy, or for a portion thereof.
http://improbable.com/ig/winners/ [improbable.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong Prize.
Re: (Score:2)
"So, the mechanics of US Democracy are fundamentally broken, and there are tons of ways to make it better. The most simple way, although it would have paradoxes of its own, just not as bad, would be to let people cast their one vote either for or against one candidate. That way, the Democrats and Republicans could mutually annihilate one another and then everyone else could get on with some real voting. Still a bit too blind though. Another way is to have everyone rank all the candidates in order of preference, or possibly just the ones they actually care about or at least know about. Once again, that should probably include a want and a do not want pile (that should help stop parties with small but rabid followings but that most of the population despises from getting a chance to win. ie, the nazi party candidate gets negative 60 million votes). There are a lot of systems that have been worked out, many with very few paradoxes (I'm not sure, but I think it may have actually been proven that you can't have a single pass system without paradoxes), that are better than the one the US uses. Partly that's because they've been worked out by very clever people who know what they're doing and how to mathematically vet the system, and partly because _ALL_ other systems of vote-taking are superior to the US system when it comes to accurately measuring the will of the populace."
I agree but the UK system is not much better. And when it comes to voting systems there are many and they all have flaws. Try getting a computer to agree with its self! then wade through the various modes and discover the problems every one has.
matfud
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Don't ignore that "or for a portion thereof." at the end. They certainly did manage to maximize gain and minimize financial risk for certain members of the economy. It's actually a simple equation. The way it works is, you take money from someone who trusts you to invest it and make a return for them, then you use various kinds of complex accounting tricks to give that money to yourself. Voila, financial gain for you at no risk, because you gave all the risk to some sucker. True genius.