LinkedIn's Labor Settlement

LinkedIn, the "World's Largest Professional Network", recently got caught by the Federal Labor Department for violating our countries standard wage laws. The professional social networking company will pay out more than 6 million dollars to current and former employees in New York, California, Illinois and Nebraska. The Labor Department stated that LinkedIn failed to fully compensate their workers for all hours worked and they violated the Fair Labor Standards Act: which says workers must be paid 7.25 plus overtime.

Although it is clear that this was just a complete accident on LinkedIn's part, it is a wonder how this could happen to such a company. According to the Labor Department LinkedIn has been described as 'eager' to work with them and fix this situation. But how could have this happened in the first place? Shannon Stubo, vice president of corporate communications, claims "This was a function of not having the right tools in place for a small subset of our sales force to track hours properly." I wonder what tools it was LinkedIn was missing that caused them to violate one of the most essential labor standards of the 19th century.

The Fair Labor Standards Act established in 1938 under President Franklin Roosevelt was what he called the most important piece of "New Deal" legislation. The standard would establish the forty-hour workweek, as well as a federal minimum wage and time-and-a-half for overtime.

It is hard to believe that a company who has made so many "Best Places to Work" list's for 2014 was found guilty for violating what would seem like the most basic labor standard. LinkedIn claims that this settlement was just a "technical error" and not in any way a "mischaracterization of employment status." Conveniently, LinkedIn claims that they had discovered and were in the process of reconciling this 'technical error' when they were contacted by the labor department.Of course, this is the depiction the professional social networking company will always attempt to portray in order to keep their reputation intact.

But no one seems to be placing any of the blame on LinkedIn; some sources citing that this confusion came about from the ambiguity of the Fair Labor Standards act. Apparently, under the Federal FLSA, some of their employees were exempt from overtime laws, but not under the conflicting state labor standards. The confusion comes from the separation of federal and state legislation: many state laws override federal depending on where the employee works. This set of fields makes sense when we consider the differences of local economies across the country. But it just goes to show that extremely large companies can overlook the most basic standards.

LinkedIn is just one example of how hard it can be for a large corporation to abide by such a wide range and variety of standards. A simple innocent mistake by one person in the company can lead to millions of dollars lost to stock holders. Such a simple standard should be easy to adhere to one would think; but due to a wide variation of standards in the labor subset, confusion can easily arise.

American Educational Standards

For being one of the wealthiest countries in the world, US students are lagging behind academically compared to many other countries. American students are particularly failing to succeed in math and science. As the first country to put a man on the moon, it seems astonishing that our students can be so fair behind countries like Singapore, Finland, Germany, Taiwan, China, Italy to name a few. Not only are American children failing to meet age-level academic standards, many American children are failing to meet proficiency levels.

Measuring academic success is difficult to define. While some students may excel in language skills, creative writing, etc. their math skills may not match up to their other achievements. Yet it is unfair to say that the student is lagging or unintelligent. Everyone learns differently, tests differently, and comprehends information differently. Therefore it is difficult, if not impossible to set an across the board standards for academics for American children. It would be unfair to many children as “unsuccessful” if they are struggling in one subject but succeeding elsewhere.

Even though it may be impossible to measure academic performance of American children, it appears that our schools need to raise the bar or adjust their current teaching methods. As one of the world’s richest countries it is simply unacceptable that a significant minority of 15-year old's fail to achieve proficient levels in elementary math, reading or writing. The failures of our rising generations will determine our future success in global economies, business, engineering and science advances. It will even decrease our world power. These children will one day be our future leaders, soldiers, and workforce and by failing to educate them properly we are failing ourselves.

I understand that education extends far beyond the classroom, and that a cultural change is most likely needed to turn around the American education system. Yet big changes are needed in the classroom as well to rapidly increase our academic standings. While these changes may be challenging to implement and measure, basic proficiency including elementary math and reading should be met to move on to the following grade. Many schools find it easier to push students through their school systems than to find the time and resources to adequately address the failures of many American children. Per capita the US regularly spends the highest per student and we still failed to perform academically to countries like South Korea and Japan who spent significantly less per student.

We need to investigate our failures and expenditures per student to pinpoint our inefficiencies and wasteful spending. With the amount of money we spend per student it is unacceptable that we are not one of the highest achieving countries in math, reading and science. We must set higher academic standards, even though it may be quite difficult, to create a better future for our rising generations. 

References: 

http://www.facethefactsusa.org/facts/money-cant-buy-genius

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/18/opinion/why-students-do-better-overseas.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/us-students-lag-around-average-on-international-science-math-and-reading-test/2013/12/02/2e510f26-5b92-11e3-a49b-90a0e156254b_story.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brettnelson/2013/01/07/new-education-standards-will-fail-your-kids-and-americas-future-if-we-dont-act-now/

Mad about Dimensions

I'm currently pretty mad about ice hockey after watching the New Jersey Devils get shutout by the Philadelphia Flyers, It was embarrassing, three power play goals scored one after the other in the first 11 minutes of the game. The Devils defense was a mess, the Flyers looked like they were on nice stroll through the park with the low level of trouble they underwent as they thoroughly dismantled the Devils Penalty Killing unit. So let's talk about ice hockey rinks and the two official standards for dimensions and markings.

Let's start with the North American rinks since they follows the NHL specification for rink dimensions and markings. Can we get picture up?

Great job Barry.

The standard rink dimensions in North America is 200 ft by 85 ft with a corner radius of 28 ft. Not every rink in North America follows this sizing but most can be assumed to be around that size. It is important to note that unlike the International ice hockey rink size, which I will get to later, this is not a maximum size but the specific size needed to be a NHL regulation sized rink. At least, I have not found anything that says otherwise, though there might be rinks in the NHL (or in the minor leagues like the AHL and the ECHL) that are smaller than the regulation size. It is unlikely though for a few reasons that relate to how the dimensions of the rink effect the way the game is played.

The small dimensions, well smaller than the international rink, means that there is less room to move around. This means that the North American style of play is more physical so as to create space for coordinated plays. It also allows chippy board play, bouncing the puck off the side boards, to be more effective as opposing players are more likely to close enough to the boards such that it would be hard to break up that kind of play. Another effect of the smaller rink is a greater emphasize on taller and larger players as they are the players best able to dish out and receive the type of play emphasized in the NHL. This is why you will often hear some hockey fans say someone is too small for the NHL but the player flourishes in European leagues or in minor professional hockey leagues.

The international standard for rink dimensions is 200 ft by 100 ft with a corner radius of 28 ft. The international standard is a bit different from the North American standard as it seems to be less strict. My understanding is that it is more of a maximum dimension for the rink and that some are smaller but within some margin for error. This comes from a few stories in the news about the rinks made for the recent Winter Olympics in Russia being made to be as big as is allowable by the IIHF (International Ice Hockey Federation) specifications.

The larger rink leads to some key differences in the way Europeans play. The larger rink allows players to hit top speed more easily as well as focus on a more finesse orient play style. Players can focus more skill and puck movement because there is a lot of space to move around already since space is not at a premium. There is not as much of  a need for the players to throw out checks or big hits on other players to create space, though the physical edge is still there as there is no real detriment to having more open ice. This also allows smaller players, well they are not really small but like between 5'6 and 5'10, to flourish as there is less of a focus or need to give or receive a hit.

There are a lot more differences between the two styles of play but they are more a result of evolving in separate leagues with different focus and do not have nearly as large effect on how the game is played like the different rink dimensions. Like in the NHL, there is the trapezoid behind goal which restricts where the goalie can play the puck. That came about due to the "dead puck" era caused by goaltenders that were highly skilled in puck handling like Marty Turco and Martin Brodeur.

Illuminating the World

Look at this screen, now at a light bulb, now back to me… clearly, this isn’t a light bulb. But it is performing the same task of artificial illumination. But it’s not like you need purchase a Westinghouse light bulb for a Westinghouse light bulb socket, some standardization needed to occur. First and foremost, the filament. Early experiments tried numerous metals with high melting points, with platinum being a popular choice amongst experimenters. Of non-metallic materials tested, carbon-based filaments were popular amongst inventors who approached, or in the case of Thomas Edison, succeeded in producing a usable incandescent light bulb. He didn’t necessarily succeed because he did something different than others, he succeeded because he produced a better quality bulb and paired it with a standard power system. Power for lights has a minor story in having originally been DC, as Edison’s electrical system generated, but later was converted to AC power which continued to work with light bulbs at the time. Paired with ability to transmit AC power over long distances, it served as a better power source for light bulbs and reduced wiring requirements to convert between AC and DC, or to have a separate DC power generation loop.

Light sockets varied between many different shapes and sizes. Eventually falling to a select couple formats including the Bayonet mount (two pins stick out of a cylinder, with a bump at the bottom of the socket element), is/which was popular in European nations, the Bi-pin/Bi-post which simply exposed the leads of the bulb out the bottom, the wedge base which you may be familiar with on Christmas lights, and the most common in the North America, numerous European nations, and expanding to other countries along with being standardized by both ANSI and IEC, the Edison screw. Originally developed by Edison and sold by General Electric as Mazda lights. Each Edison screw has a standardized screw thread size, cap size (the part attached to the light bulb), and holder size (the part the light bulb is attached to). Each socket size is designed to hold a different bulb size, from small E10 (10mm diameter) base for small light bulbs such as those used in flashlights. E26 (26mm diameter) is often used in North America for a standard light bulb in common appliances. Depending on the country, some Edison screws determine voltage requirements too, such as E39 being for high-power street lights.

Light bulb shapes share much in common with light sockets. Many light bulb shapes depended on the company they were manufactured by. Most eventually ended up being shaped similar to Edison’s original bulb, which after becoming a little shapelier, is now common for many North American households. But many depend on the use, location, and power requirements. For example, a reflector-based light is designed to provide a very focused but high-powered light source, which is why we often call them flood lights as they “flood” the area with light. Low-power light bulbs are often smaller then high-power light bulbs. Even position, such as decoration, can determine if a light bulb is the general light bulb shape or looks like, for example, a flame.

The last major area of light bulb standardization, and the one fluctuating the most right now, is actually the light source. Edison and other’s original light bulbs were incandescent that “burned” a filament to produce light. The most common non-incandescent light source is florescent bulbs, that not only come in a very different format compared to incandescent (a tube bulb with a bi-pin contact point), and at a lower power requirement along with distinct lighting properties. Something similar, called a cold-cathode fluorescent lamp, is often located in LCD computer monitors and LCD TVs. While fluorescent lights don’t seem like they will be changing too much in the coming years, their more efficient nature and ability to be shaped has led them to become a popular replacement for incandescent bulbs, known as compact fluorescent lamp. These CFLs use the same Edison screw as others do, and come in similar related shapes. The latest light bulb to shine (*cough* ha ha *cough*) is the light emitting diode, or LED. Just like CFLs, they use the same socket and similar shape to incandescent, but they have the advantage of being more efficient, or equal to fluorescent/CFL for similar lighting requirements… but being able to last nearly 2.5 to 5 times longer than CFL, which already have nearly 10 times the lifespan as incandescent light bulbs. The only downside LEDs have right now is they are nearly 17 times the cost of incandescent and 7 times the cost of CFL. They are already popular with electronics manufacturers, but the qualities are also a reason it’s one reason they are being pushed to be adopted by consumers in many retail stores today.

Worldwide Standards in the Field Of Education

Standards in Education

                

              Being completely educated in the United States, more specifically in the state of New Jersey, one would think being a student would be like second nature by my current age. This is a misconstrued statement, due to the fact that each professor and/ or teacher possesses a different standard to which they constitute academic excellence or an A. Throughout my courses, I have noticed a number of things. The education system is structured around agreeing with the course material simply or it is a complete “fight” until the end. 

                My point is that there is a lack of standardized processes or criteria in which to get the best grade one can possibly get. With this lack of standard, the education system becomes harder to master and every class seems to feel like a different adventure or new quest. This is what makes the education very challenging and, in another perspective interesting. One can look at this system as a way to force students to think in a different way every day, opening their horizons. One must get into the psyche of the professor to understand what he or she is looking for. Even though from the students perspective it can be very frustrating to experience, but it is beneficial.

                From talking to friends that I have made in Europe, they often tell me the way to get a good grade in America differs compared to Europe. In Europe, the students explained to me that it is heavily based on being consistent with your homework rather than understanding what your professor is trying to explain to you. From a psychological standpoint, one can infer that Europe really tries to drive in the idea of hard work amongst their students.

                The standard in Egypt is heavily based on the standardized final exam. I recall my cousins often telling me that their entire year will have to be repeated if they do not pass their exams. This displays that the Egyptian education system is heavily based on performance and efficiency in getting the information across. It seems that they do not appreciate really “marinating” in a subject, as compared to the United States.

                In conclusion, the youth of the education system are the first to be molded by the standards that they encounter in their school. One can infer that this makes the difference in which the people of the nation obtain their strengths. This ideology would be supported by the fact that the US is 7^th in the world in the field of innovation and sophistication. Therefore to conclude, the standards in which one holds themselves to can be directly related to the field of expertise the end up working in. 

Reinheitsgebot Elevating Beer to a New Level

Since alcoholic beverages were first invented, they have been a central part of our society and culture. They have been argument for controversy in many countries for the last century and a lot has changed since it alcohol entered our lives.

The specific argument I would like to talk about today is the Standard for quality in alcoholic beverages in different countries.  The most interesting country is Germany, where in 1516 the Bavarian state introduces a De Jure standard for the quality and purity of beer produced in that region of the Holy Roman Empire and its successor state of Germany. This Standard was called Reinheitsgebot, which literally means purity law in German and sets a standard across the board for beer. Stating that only beers made from certain ingredients and in certain conditions are aloud to be called beer and sold in the country. This is particularly interesting because this standard was introduced by a brewer to try and limit competition in the Holy Roman Empire, but after the “Empire” realized that because of this standard, the quality if the beer was much superior to every other one, they decided to enforce this standard under the Purity Law.

This made it particularly easy to identify products that complied with the law because those were aloud to be called beer, splitting the market in high and low quality beer.

Another aspect I would like to mention about this standard that not many people realize is that quality alcohol is much better, not only taste wise. From personal experience I have noticed that the quality of the alcohol has just as much to do with the "next day performance" an hangover the next day as the quantity. 

What I experienced is that when I am drinking high quality beer that complies with the purity law, the next day I feel fine, as if I didn’t drink at all. On the other hand if I drink the same amount of beer, under the same conditions, of a beer that does not comply with that law, (Heineken, Budweiser, Sam Adams, Paps Blue Ribbon), the next morning I am not feeling the same way I would with a Bavarian beer.

Because these beers are not produced in Bavaria that are not required to follow the purity law.

The introduction of this standard into society is especially interesting to me because it created an elite of brewers in Germany that is still regarded today as the best one in the world and elevated the quality of products to another level.

Alcohol is such a delicate subject when coming to standards because every country is raised and educated differently about alcohol and I feel that a single blog post might not be enough.

To be continued...

Standards in Physical Education

               Throughout the United States, many public school districts are implementing physical education standards. The purpose of these standards is to maintain and improve one’s physical health, mental health, and overall well-being. It is believed that a student who takes part in physical education is more likely to become a healthy adult who is motivated to remain healthy and physically active throughout his or her life. The physical education model used by many school districts contains standards that represent the essential skills and knowledge that students need to maintain a physically active, healthy lifestyle. The program identifies what each student should know and should be able to do at each grade level.  With adequate instruction and sustained effort, students should be able to achieve the standards. The standards provide a framework for teachers and schools to follow, but the decision about how best to teach the standards is up to the individual.

                According to the Society of Health and Physical Educators, the five national physical education standards are: (1) The physically literate individual demonstrates competency in a variety of motor skills and movement patterns, (2) The physically literate individual applies knowledge of concepts, principles, strategies and tactics related to movement and performance, (3) The physically literate individual demonstrates the knowledge and skills to achieve and maintain a health-enhancing level of physical activity and fitness, (4) The physically literate individual exhibits responsible personal and social behavior that respects self and others, and (5) The physically literate individual recognizes the value of physical activity for health, enjoyment, challenge, self-expression and/or social interaction.

                Implementing physical education standards poses many benefits for students. Students learn to take increasing accountability for their physical health, because they understand the significance of being active and have been challenged to maintain a dynamic lifestyle. When students establish an active lifestyle during their juvenile years, it is more likely that they will continue regular activity as they enter their adult years and reduce the chances for the onset of hyperkinetic diseases such as stroke, obesity, type 2 Diabetes, and heart attack. Physical education programs that proactively promote physical activity and fitness support the entire learning process. A positive correlation has been documented between fitness and academic achievement.

                

                While these standards pose many potentially beneficial outcomes for students, one of the most important areas of the program is the teaching and instruction. An effective teacher is one who knows how to teach students about exercise science and the other factors that underlie a healthy, active lifestyle. At the same time, teachers, “need to inform students rather than scare them, to inspire rather than preach, and to be inclusive rather than exclusive. They are not training athletes, but educating active, healthy citizens.” ¹

                It is important to remember that the real focus must be on physical activity levels, nutrition, and lifestyle, and not just on percent body fat or weight. If teachers focus on percent body fat or BMI, they will send the wrong message to students about their body and how to care for it. Students with very little previous physical activity may be intimidated by these standards and feel inadequate if their peers are performing above the level that they are capable of. It is important that these students get the individual attention and education they need because they are the true target of these standards. While it is beneficial for all students to develop and maintain an active lifestyle, overweight or at-risk students should remain the focus of these physical education programs.

¹ Peter Rattigan, “Battling Obesity in K-12 Learners from an Exercise Physiology Perspective,” http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ795604.pdf

Additional sources:

http://www.shapeamerica.org/standards/pe/

Secret Service

                Recently there have been an increased number of attempts to penetrate the White House security. You would never think that anyone would put their life at risk and attempt to get inside the front door of the most heavily guarded residence in the United States. In just the past few weeks there have been 2 men that have jumped the fence and headed for the house. In situations like these, the secret service has many critical choices to make in a very short amount of time. It is from this that I have started to wonder about the type of standards they have for making the correct decisions and using the right amount of force in these types of scenarios.

                In the type of events we have recently seen, the threat level hasn’t exactly been extreme as neither of the trespassers were in possession of a type of bag to house an explosive device or a gun of any sort. Given the residence that it is, what type of standards does the secret service have to make the correct call when someone approaches the White House.  In the most recent fence jumping attempt, the man made it all the way into the White House before being subdued. The statement in the news said that the man did not have a backpack on and did not appear to have a weapon on him, and therefore warranted the lower degree of force. He did still manage to get inside the house though. While the President has full confidence in the SS, which he definitely should, I think this may make some people look over their standards for their security, or for the manner in which they deal with these situations. This one did not have any consequences but we certainly don’t want to wait for something to happen before things get changed like with their incident in 2012 in Columbia.

                Back in 2012, the standards for the SS got a few new additions to counter act their prostitution scandal in Columbia. Seems like a pretty classic case of having to add new standards that you would think would be followed by common sense. In a job like working for the Secret Service, professionalism is extremely important.  When representing the government, you can bet they have a surplus of standards in the professionalism category, and they just got a few more. It looks like the standards for dealing with fence jumpers might be getting a few more now too. All in all, I think we can all agree that if the situation warrants, the SS will not have any problem using more aggressive force. This really brought to light how many standards we all think about everyday as we keep in mind being accountable for all of our actions. While you may not realize you are thinking about standards throughout your day, they really are everywhere.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-code-of-conduct-issued-for-secret-service-agents/

http://news.yahoo.com/why-the-secret-service-didn-t-shoot-the-fence-jumper-160933257.html

FBI Facial Recognition System

Biometric refers to technologies used to detect and recognize unique human physical characteristics for the purpose of identification and authentication of a user to a system. Common examples include fingerprint and retinal scanning, facial recognition, and voice analysis. These types of biometric have become  the norm and standard way to access ones phone to entering building. Yet, over the past week, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has announced its next generation surveillance system  which uses facial recognition biometric combined with criminal fingerprints. The FBI claims the project is out of the pilot stage and is at "full operational capability” promoting its full deployment.  According to the bureau's director, James Comey  the system“ will provide the nation's law enforcement community with an investigative tool that provides an image-searching capability of photographs associated with criminal identities”. Cross-checking images and fingerprints with those in other criminal databases may not seem intrusive however, the Electronic Frontier Foundation “EFF” issued  a  FOIA request under the under the Freedom of Information Act a obtain records showing that the database will have as many as 52 million photos by next year and include pictures of innocent people. In addition, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, has obtained documents expressing concern with the accuracy of recognition citing that “the system could fail 20 percent of the time, which the group said could lead to innocent persons becoming the subject of police investigations.”

However, the effectiveness of facial recognition system has shown to be viable and powerful after a US fugitive on the run for 14 years in connection with child sex charges was apprehended in Nepal. This arrest was made possible by the State Department testing facial recognition software to detect passport fraud. The FBI continues to praise the system ensuring the use is for good rather invasion of privacy, stating “The NGI system has introduced enhanced automated fingerprint and latent search capabilities, mobile fingerprint identification, and electronic image storage, all while adding enhanced processing speed and automation for electronic exchange of fingerprints to more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies and other authorized criminal justice partners 24 hours a day, 365 days a year”. Based on the latest arrest figures available, many have estimated, that this system will result in more than 12 million arrests in the US, which is equivalent to one arrest every two seconds.

It seems in the near future, that facial recognition systems  will cut down the time and cost in investigations and may be seen as something standard and normal to the public, in applying for a new position, updating their drivers licence or even uploading their photos online. 

Everyone Poops: A Social Standard of Private Poop Practices

Like the educational children’s book states “everyone poops”. I poop. You poop. Everyone and their mother poops. But humans are not the only creatures who do. All living things from humans to cats to plants to single celled organisms perform, to some extent, a type of excretory function.  Excretion is a natural function in which the organism eliminates or expels metabolic waste matter. All life forms carry out this essential process, which, if disrupted, leads to the poisoning of the organism’s or cell’s body by toxic waste products. This poisoning of the body leads to the disruption of other bodily functions—in the case of animals, other organ functions—which could prove harmful to the body and potentially lead to the subject’s death. If “pooping”, as is the colloquial term used to reference to excretion, is so natural and so essential to life itself, why is it that we hold such a negative view of all things poop-related and show such negative reactions to any mention of it? Why is it that, despite having to perform this function to continue living a healthy life, we have such a strong aversion to mentioning it and display signs of disapproval when it is?

In many societies and cultures, poop, because it is waste excreted from the body—an unwanted substance— people perceive the process as something dirty and unrefined; one that is done in privacy and never talked about so as to not taint conversation with so-called “dirty talk”. In my own family, whenever the topic comes up, even jokingly, at the dinner table, it is soon quelled. Among friends, it is a brave (although sometimes vulgar) man that blatantly admits to having to poop, rather than simply excusing himself to go the bathroom. In other cultures, the aversion to poop stems even to poop-related objects; the left hand, in some cultures, is solely designated to attend to bathroom activities and thus to use the left hand rather than the “clean” right hand to greet another is a great sign of disrespect and lack of refinement. In an article written by Horace Miner for the American Anthropologist titled ”Body Ritual Among the Nacirema”, Miner presents the ritual  practices of a small North American tribe known as the Nacirema. “The fundamental belief,” Miner states:

Underlying the whole system appears to be that the human body is ugly and that its natural tendency is to debility and disease. Incarcerated in such a body, man's only hope is to avert these characteristics through the use of ritual and ceremony. Every household has one or more shrines devoted to this purpose… While each family has at least one such shrine, the rituals associated with it are not family ceremonies but are private and secret. The rites are normally only discussed with children, and then only during the period when they are being initiated into these mysteries. (1)

         While these ritual practices of this so-called Nacirema tribe may seem to be mysterious, strange, and unfamiliar, in fact the practices that Miner writes about are a reflection of modern-day American bathroom practice; with “Nacirema” a backwards spelling of “American”, the ritual shrine referring to the concept of a private bathroom, and the rites and practices taught to children is their so-called “potty training”. In Miner’s description of bathroom practices, he deems these behaviors as “private and secret”, and indeed American and modern-day perceptions of such practices are centered around being personal and behind closed doors; is that not the point of having single person bathrooms within the home? For children who have not yet mastered control over their excretory functions, parents are often made to feel shame for “failing” to teach them and children are shamed in not being able to master it.

While this lack of mastery does prove a problem in society today where there are designated areas to perform such functions, namely the bathroom and not the bedroom, it is where this societal standard comes from that sparks interest. Is it because of this societal standard and negative perception of excretory function that things such as private bathrooms and behaviors such as using the left hand to clean oneself arose, or is it because of the development of such things that the perception of such functions developed? For either, why is that so?

In any case, while I agree that poop is an odd topic to talk about among friends, it is the waste matter itself that is dirty, not the talking of it. I do not think that poop and poop-related topics should be taboo as it is today, within reason. That is, I do not want to be hearing about bowel movements while I’m eating dinner, but admitting that one poops or that they have to should not be something they should be shy or ashamed to say, if only among friends. We all know that it happens, and it’s natural. Why must we treat it like it’s not?

Citations:

1. https://www.msu.edu/~jdowell/miner.html

Apple's Chinese Factories Improved Working Conditions

         I found an article in the business insider called "How Apple is Making Sure It's Overseas Workers Are Treated Fairly" that talks about what Apple has done now to actually help fix the problem in the system that allowed for workers to work in many unsafe and unlawful work environments. I dug deeper into this issue to see exactly what had been happening.
        For a while Apple was violating many laws that govern what should and should not be allowed to occur in factories. More specifically, one of their largest violations was people working unbelievable hours overtime. They also found a 15 year old boy dead at a factory. Many suicides and attempted suicides were known to have occurred at the factory, mostly due to the number of hours being worked. Apple had stated that if their suppliers wanted to continue to do business wit them they would have to keep up with the standards. While they were under review in December, most of the plants kept working hours within the industry low which is about 50 to 60 hours per week. (China's legal limit is 49.)
      Personally, I think that the numbers recorded in the various Foxconn factory locations by the FLA (Federal Labor Association) were OK for aw review period. I believe that the numbers showed during a review period in a factory known to have poor employee work environment will most likely be false, especially after the supplier has been bad mouthed for its conditions over an extended period of time and not made any notable changes during studies up until this point in December. It could go either way: if all they did was cut hours to try to adapt the situation, they might be able To keep them relatively low, but probably not as low as what was found during the review period, which still wasn't in its legal limits.
      While these Apple factories are taking some steps to improve conditions, There are still other problems brought up in the article that will definitely need to be addressed. "China Labor Watch, a non-profit group that monitors Chinese factories, said in a recent report that it uncovered a wide range of violations during an examination of factories in Shanghai and Suzhou run by Apple contractor Pegatron Corp. The problems included sexual discrimination, excessive working hours, poor living conditions and pollution." (Associated Press). 
      In the Business Insider, I found that Apple's CEO, Tim Cook, reported that Apple has been providing education at its factories after the December report. It is comparable to Apple University, reportedly. This is huge. It is one step closer to everyone receiving some kind of education through work. I believe that if they can do this after what it was, any company can. It will be interesting to see reactions on the large scale, and if other suppliers try to emulate it, whether they are forced to by regulation or they have some type of epiphany. ***Standardization! yay!!!*** Time will tell, but my best advice for the average consumer is to purchase wisely! There is a list of sweatshop-free products of all types that can be found online. Each purchase counts, so does sharing accurate information. (I was inspired by this topic because I was head of a club in high school that actively educated people and wrote to sweatshops asking to improve working conditions.)



http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/apple-s-chinese-factories-improved-working-conditions-1.2461718
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-supply-chain-foxconn-workers-rights-2014-9

Standards and... The Stute?

"Blog post" was the text I received from someone in this class reminding me to write this. Meanwhile, as I checked the message, I rolled my eyes, annoyed that I had yet another thing to do. I wasn't annoyed because I had a lot of homework or anything, but because in less than 15 minutes The Star Ledger needed the PDF files to print, pack, and ship The Stute to the Howe Center in the morning, and we were still a ways to go before the paper was finished and the deadline was met.

Now, as I write this paragraph, I just finished a less-than-four-second search on Google News with the keyword "standards." Shale drilling standards... common core standards... olive oil standards — I wasn't into any of this. I thought for a moment about discussing professional wrestling standards, but I didn't want to repeat the same topic as two weeks ago. Plus, this was a full topic that couldn't be tackled in a single blog post (at least well). Alas, to make my long prelude short, I decided that in this post I would discuss overall standards regarding The Stute and, in turn, the newspaper industry.

Let's get it going.

From top to bottom, The Stute (or any printed publication for that matter) oozes standards: headline size, headline font type, border size for images, formatting for captions, image color modes specific to print, and several more. Some of these standards are devised by us, but almost all are derived from the authority on newspaper style, the Associated Press (AP).

A juicy example of voluntary consensus, the guidelines set forth by the AP Stylebook, the Holy Bible of the news industry, are not law. However, all professionals in the news industry have an understood agreement that the AP Stylebook is the standard for how news and newspapers should be formatted and agree to adhere to its guidelines by their own volition.

The Stute is no exception.

For example, let's examine some of AP's recent changes to its style guide:

- In 2011, "website," "email," "cellphone," and "smartphone" lost their hyphens and spaces and became one word.

- In 2012, "illegal immigrant" was defined to include anyone who "resides in a country in criminal or civil violation of immigration law."

- In 2013, then changed "illegal immigrant" to "illegal immigration," because the crime is illegal, not the person, and (I won't even paraphrase here) "reversed its opinion that the term 'partners' be used to describe legally married same-sex couples. The stylebook now recommends that 'husbands and wives' be used to describe such couples.

While those four changes are just a microscopic sample of the amount of content AP features in its style guide, it is telling of a key component that defines the Associated Press: recommendation. AP's guidelines do not necessarily correspond to what we see on Gizmodo, high school essays, and even college work. In fact, the notion of putting two spaces after each period is a custom we learn in high school and is one that many still adhere to today. However, according to AP, only one space is to be used after a period. Plus, we see "e-mail," "E-Mail," and "E-mail" all the time. What the heck is all of this? A prime example of voluntary consensus on a global level.

From CNN to ESPN, the titans of the news industry follow what are essentially made-up guidelines by some non-profit newsies in New York. Who allows them to recommend the ban of the word "homophobia" in news publications? Who allows them to define what an illegal immigrant is or isn't? Who gave them such power? We did. Yep, by voluntarily agreeing to some group's suggestions (and I understand that is oversimplifying the Associated Press), a tomb of "tips" became pseudo-law.

I'm not against the Associated Press. In fact, The Stute is not the most strict follower of AP's guidelines either. Most of The Stute is derived from AP, but is not necessarily AP itself. In fact, The Stute only truly adheres to AP with respect to formatting text. We don't have a ban on "homophobia" in our writing, nor do we have one on really any other word, except for profanities and other inappropriate words or phrases that we deem so at our own discretion. We use AP as a guide, not law. This point may seem obvious and, well, pointless, but it's a clear-cut example of an organization that participates in the most unique relationship borne from standards: voluntary consensus. And while we don't follow AP to the letter, our organization has been recognized on numerous occasions by the Associated Press' collegiate journalism sect for excellence.

Not everyone's looking to mandate and control. Concepts like voluntary consensus may seem dismiss-able in theory, but in practice, we don't even notice the phenomenon is occurring. It simply does.

The history and standards of landfills

Have you ever wondered what happens to the trash that gets thrown in the garbage every day?  An increase in the recycling industry reduced the amounts of trash or Municipal Solid Waste produced in recent years, however Americans still generated 251 tons of solid waste in 2012.  There are several ways to dispose of waste, but the vast majority winds up in a landfill to naturally decompose.  It might seem like a fairly simple process, but what started out as a process of burning trash, has turned into a very innovative and sophisticated science.

            Trash was never thought of to be a problem, for a long time the phrase “out of sight, out of mind” was used in regards to solid waste and it was disposed of by any means necessary. Following the end of World War 2 there was a need to change traditional practices.  This included dumping trash in the ocean and allowing scavengers and pigs to sort through the remaining garbage.  Afterwards it was pushed into a pile and set on fire to be disposed of. In 1953 suggested guidelines were set in place to prevent illnesses from the open burning.  This was a revolutionary development in trash disposal that replaced the burning process with a self-contained burial system.  While this system was far from perfect it was a great deviation from previous methods.  This process solved the immediate issue of illness, but still posed a great threat to the surrounding communities from pests, harmful leachate seeping into the groundwater, and explosive gas being produced.

            With time passing the U.S. Public health service did as much as it could to make progress with trash disposal techniques.  In 1965 the Solid Waste Disposal Act convinced many states to establish laws when it came to landfills in an effort to avoid harm to the surrounding environment.  Awareness was building when it came to landfills, but even with the development of the EPA in 1970 efforts were mainly focused on regulating other waste management techniques.  Finally in 1984, (only 20 years ago!) the EPA was granted authority to regulate sanitary landfills with a very strict set of design and maintenance regulations that maximize the disposal efficiency.  With fifty years of combined ideas there were extensive lists of guidelines that sanitary landfills were required to adhere to.

            Since 1984 there have been advancements in the waste management field, some of which can even produce energy from the gasses produced during decomposition.  Environmental engineering has extensively expanded in such a way that the time of deterioration can be calculated and redevelopment can occur on the land in the future.  On the EPA website many of the new rules are showcased for public viewing so that it is known what restrictions Landfills may face.  Clay layers, a waterproof geomembrane, gas monitors, leachate removal systems, and groundwater monitoring are all mandated in today’s standards for landfills along with strict operating procedures to ensure safety.  It may not be rocket science, but standards are the basis of solid waste management, and will continue to be as long as humans produce waste.

Sources:

http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/municipal/landfill.htm

http://www.mswmanagement.com/MSW/Articles/A_Brief_History_of_Solid_Waste_Mangement_in_the_US_4437.aspx

Standards of professional Baseball Scouting (I promise it's interesting)

Standard of Baseball Scouting

            Professional baseball has been played for over 150 years. In all facets of the game, baseball is covered with tradition.  But who isn’t aware of this, its “America’s pastime!” There’s nothing more wholesome than going to the ballpark with your family! Just like your parents did and your grandparents! It’s a culture that prides itself on being a constant throughout time.

But despite all the fanfare and nostalgia, something we have to remember…Baseball organizations are a business. So a logical person would assume that the business would have an extremely sophisticated way of obtaining the best talent in the world (the whole crux of their business model). Well guess what logical guesser! The standard for talent scouting is almost exactly the same in present day as it was in baseball’s inception. There is nothing sophisticated about it in any way (until the early 2000's..but Ill get to that).

The sport is bogged down in archaic forms of scouting based solely on word of mouth, intuition, and opinionated guesswork. A typical baseball scout will go watch a player and will rate them on a multitude of abilities that they (in all of their professional wisdom) perceive. The standard grading scale is from 2-8. A 5 is the typical “Major League” ability and an 8 means they should probably just go to the Hall Of Fame right now.

This is a typical sheet a scout uses

            When organizations go about selecting players to offer contracts to, they basically take a bunch of these reports and disseminate who they believe has the most likelihood of being a successful baseball player. Many times it is obvious to any person who follows baseball when a player has exceptional talent. But how often can bold face guess work and intuition be the best way to go about investing hundreds of millions of dollars in talent?

            It took until 2001 for a General Manager (A GM is the person who has the most authority over scouting and player acquisition) in Major League Baseball to think “HEY! Maybe there is a more sophisticated and reliable way we can invest our billions!” That man was Billy Bean, GM of the Oakland Athletics. Some of you may be familiar with the movie Moneyball in which he is the main character.* Bean decided that since his team was one of the worst in baseball (and by far the most poor) to screw tradition and scout players with a new standard! He wanted to find the value that everybody else was missing with this archaic form of talent scouting. So what he applied is a form of scouting now called SABRMetrics (or Moneyball for short).

            Money ball is all centered on vast amounts of data collection and a computer. Instead of valuing a player by guestimating his potential, he used computer models to disseminate  which players were the safest investments, much like an investor on Wall St. would do. In his first year applying this new scheme the Oakland Athletics set an MLB record for most consecutive wins. Thus a new standard was born. The Boston Red Sox applied Moneyball theories starting the next season, and by 2004 they had won the World Series. This all but proved that Moneyball is the new standard to scout player talent. Today almost every organization has adopted their own form of Moneyball strategies to their clubs. While nobody would venture to say it is the pure standard at which every organization develops talent, it is unmistakable the affect it has had on scouting (as well as baseball as a whole) and has no doubt shifted the standards to a much more data centered source.

*This novel and movie are based on a true story, and if you are interested at all by this idea then you should check them both out. They do a much more detailed and entertaining job of describing this intriguing story and the movie was nominated for a litany of Oscars so you know it’s good. It also has Brad Pitt in it.