Counterintuitive Spring 2024

Happiness Is…

Happiness by today’s standards is an ever changing idea.  People have different ideas and opinion’s about happiness, but who is right?  The truth is that nobody knows.  Countless studies are conducted claiming a recipe for happiness while others claim to know why we like unhappiness.  The theories and support for proving happiness are as varied as they are vague.  There is no real formula for happiness, all we can do is what we think is right, and the rest will follow.

Happiness can be defined as being in a positive state of well being.  Self-help experts claim that the first step to leading a happier life is to make positive lifestyle changes such as diet, exercise, and good social relationships.  In an article by Channa Serenity, she claims that there are seven points that can lead to a happy life.  Her main point is that, “Health is our authentic wealth.”  The fact is that health is not necessarily a guarantee for a happy life, and the rest of her article is outlining how the seven points benefit someone to stay on a diet.  Someone who is already on a diet and exercises regularly can still be an unhappy person because of family issues or health concerns that can’t be cured with diet and exercise.   Certain researchers decide to observe the patterns behavior in happy people.  People who are happy typically exhibit or adhere to certain behaviors, for instance they may wake up early or drink something other than coffee in the mornings.  While one specific habit cannot be an absolute indicator of happiness in life, a broad range of lifestyle choices, can be.  Gregory Ciotti wrote an article about 15 habits that are typically exhibited by happy people.  In the article, there are ideas ranging from maintaining relationships, to self-awareness, to focusing on goals.  While it is impossible to narrow down what specifically makes people happy, the article does cover lifestyle changes that are broad and vague enough to have some bearing on happiness among individuals.  Gregory does admit that, “I simply feel that research is a great place to start when observing the patterns of happy people.”  Meaning if there was a place to begin to grasp at the enormous subject, research is the best start.  At the same time he agrees, “It seems a grandiose notion to define happiness with research, doesn’t it?”  However the points that he raises are broad and diffuse enough that his efforts to truly “define” happiness are futile.  Behavioral research is the closest thing to defining or providing a recipe for happiness that could be achieved.  The problem being its evidence would have to be broad and therefore difficult to understand.

One of the most understood and common assumptions about happiness is that it cannot be bought.  Countless examples are listed for people who are obsessed with material possessions and when that goal is finally achieved, there is dissatisfaction with the attained items.  In a New York Times article by Arthur Brooks, there is the story of Abd al-Rahman who had attained everything in wealth and power, yet he characterized his genuine happiness over his 50 years to be a mere 14 days.  Arthur went on to write that Abd al-Rahman decided to, “Love Things, Use People.”  His problem was characterized by the fact that he put his love into objects that could not reciprocate his love and emotion.  Arthur goes on to offer a simple explanation, “Love People, Use Things.”  Meaning Abd al-Rahman should have invested his love and happiness into people, and put less interest into material possessions.  He gives the suggestion to, “Only deny love to things that actually are objects. The practice that achieves this is charity.”  The issue with giving away material possessions to accept love from others is when it is taken too far.  As quickly as happiness can be won from giving things away, it can be taken by not having possessions to sustain oneself.  If someone were to give in the name of charity to ones friends, they may become greedy and seek to absorb more than what is given and take what they please.  Few things would feel worse than realizing a friend is only there to take from someone.

Self control is another factor claimed to have a superior effect on happiness.  If someone is able to delay gratification in order to seek the long-term benefits, in this case happiness, they have happier lives.  A classic research example of self control and long term benefits is the marshmallow test.  In an article by Chuck Hadad reporting on the marshmallow test, the self-control test was given to children showing profound effects on children later on.  The test showed that the children who waited 15 minutes for the “long term” benefit of more marshmallows was shown to be able to achieve happier lives.  While choosing long-term over short-term benefits could lead to happier living, this isn’t an accurate assessment of living a happier life.  People could make the right decisions and still lead an unhappy life because of events that were out of their control.  At the same time, just because someone prefers short-term benefits doesn’t mean they won’t be happy.  A person can be completely satisfied with making short-term happiness decisions throughout their lives, if nothing “bad” happens that results in unhappiness, then they shouldn’t be unhappy lives.

Efforts have been made to prove that individuals’ happiness influences overall societal happiness.  It would seem to make sense since all individuals make up the society as a whole, an individual’s happiness should be proportional.  In an article by Mark Williamson, he discusses the prosperity of England over the last several decades that comes at the cost of people losing trust in one another and a myriad of social problems.  He expresses his opinion that the loss of trust and happiness can be alleviated by, “focusing our time and energy instead on things that have been shown to consistently bring happiness, we can live rich, rewarding lives.”  The fault in Mark’s logic is that focusing time and energy on anything is an investment, and investments don’t always pay off.  There is also a lack of specificity for bringing the happiness.  In the article he describes typical activities that are claimed to bring happiness, such as improving relationships, self-awareness, and purpose in life, but he fails to go into detail.  How can social relationships be improved to bring happiness?  How can someone increase their self-awareness so that they are happy?  Most compelling being, how can a purpose in life bring happiness?

Emily Smith wrote an article claiming that happy and meaningful lives are not the same thing.  The evidence behind her article comes from her citations of renowned psychologist Viktor Frankl.  In his life, he chose to choose a more meaningful life by comforting his parents in Nazi concentration camps rather than pursue a happy life with his wife and family in America.  Throughout the article she attempts to prove the point that life needs more than just happiness, “Gallup also reports that 60% all Americans today feel happy…4 out of 10 Americans have not discovered a satisfying life purpose.”  Having a satisfying life purpose doesn’t necessarily prove that someone would be happier.  She makes the claim that “Research” shows that a life purpose does provide more satisfaction in life but fails to provide any specific examples of research conducted on the topic.  Take an oncologist who only works with terminally ill patients as an example.  They have found that it is absolutely their purpose in life to help their patients deal with the diagnosis and oversee their treatments until they die.  While it is a truly noble purpose, they cannot possibly maintain happiness while witnessing the inevitable death of their patients month after month.  Someone could have a genuinely noble purpose in life but if it detracts from their happiness, they inevitably will not be happy.

Making decisions that will lead to personal happiness doesn’t mean their selfish.  In Emily Smith’s article she makes the argument that being a “taker” is associated with a happy life, meaning selfish decisions would make a person happier overall.  Her evidence comes from the Journal of Positive Psychology where the authors state, “Happiness without meaning characterizes a relatively shallow, self-absorbed or even selfish life.”  While it is apparent that being unhappy doesn’t mean one is leading a meaningful life, it doesn’t draw the absolute conclusion that being happy without meaning is ultimately selfish.  Someone could draw pleasure from the simplest gesture that couldn’t be characterized as selfish or selfless.  If someone is merely happy reading the morning paper with a cup of coffee, that person is hardly an image of selfish greed.  Therefore the claim that being happy without meaning condemns one to be selfish is harsh and hollow.

Maintaining good social relationships is a recurring favorite among researchers trying to prove what makes people happy.  Happiness could be achieved by keeping good close relationships where you can open up to others about problems, they support one when needed, and provide a sense of identity.  A PBS article outlines four major happiness benefits from connecting with others, “Belonging to a group gives us a sense of identity…Researchers have found that people are happier when they are with other people than when they are alone…Happiness may be surprisingly contagious…The positive effects from connecting with others are lasting.”  While these points are certainly possibilities for happiness theoretically, practically the situation may be different.  If the friend abandon someone because of something they did, then there are no friends to talk to he/she about the major problems in their life.  They loose the close connections and could loose happiness very quickly and very likely become depressed.  Just because someone currently has good relationships, doesn’t mean they will last.

A curious argument about happiness is that people actually prefer to be unhappy.  Some research conducted supports the conclusion that people enjoy being unhappy because they don’t like to be happy and then “fall” back to unhappiness.  In an article by David Sack, he lists ten points as to why people choose to be unhappy ranging from the fear of something new to pride in realism.  He goes on to say, “It is often said that “happiness is a choice.” But then why aren’t more people happy?”  The statement he provides operates under the assumption that there is always a choice whether or not to be happy.  Certain situations allow people the choice to choose to be happy, for example a flight is going to be unpleasant, might as well try and be happy, no place to go but up.  If more people were unhappy in those situations then his support would be more founded, however raising the question as to why people are unhappy when they could simply choose to be is a flawed premise.  Just because people choose to be unhappy doesn’t mean they are afforded the opportunity every single time.

The truth is that how can people accurately decide that life needs more than happiness.  Millions of people everyday go through their lives leading selfish albeit happy lives.  These people don’t necessarily have feelings of discontent, and the evidence behind what would make them more happy is inconclusive.  The problem with dissecting and proving what makes people happy is incredibly complex due to the simple fact happiness means something different for everyone.  People who lead selfish lives and are happy about it, wouldn’t be more happy or fulfilled if they sacrificed their happiness for meaning.

Works Cited

Smith, Emily E. “There’s More to Life Than Being Happy.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 09 Jan. 2013. Web. 30 Mar. 2015. This is a main source used to make the counterargument that happiness is based on meaning in life.

 “The Journal of Positive Psychology Ad-Hoc Reviewers 2008.” The Journal of Positive Psychology 10.3 (2015): n. pag. Web. This source is used to provide a statistical quote for the meaning and happiness topic of the debate.

Serenity, Channa. “Health Is Our Authentic Wealth: 7 Tips to Make Positive Lifestyle Changes.” MindBodyGreen. MindBodyGreen, LLC., 06 Aug. 2012. Web. 02 Mar. 2015. This source is used as evidence that what makes people happy cannot be solely based on diet and exercise.

Hadad, Chuck. “What ‘marshmallow Test’ Can Teach You about Your Kids – CNN.com.” CNN. Cable News Network, 22 Dec. 2014. Web. 24 Apr. 2015. This source is used for the background for the marshmallow test results for self control and happiness.

Ciotti, Gregory. “How to Be Happy: 15 Common Habits.” Sparring Mind RSS. Sparring Mind, 11 Sept. 2013. Web. 26 Apr. 2015. This source is used as an example of research supporting a variety of lifestyle changes that would improve happiness.

Williamson, Mark. “Let the Happiness In.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Ltd., 12 Apr. 2011. Web. Source used for the counterargument of proving happiness in society.

“Connecting.” PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2015. Source counterargument for the happiness and social relationships.

Brooks, Arthur C. “Love People, Not Pleasure.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 July 2014. Web. 27 Apr. 2015. A source providing background for the counterargument that happiness cannot be bought.

Sack, David, M.D. “Are You Addicted to Unhappiness?” Psychology Today. Sussex Publishers LLC, 5 Mar. 2014. Web. 27 Apr. 2015. Source providing counterargument that people prefer unhappiness to being happy.

Euthanasia; The Freedom of Choice

Many see death as a sad end to the beauty of life. But, to those who suffer from terminal illness, euthanasia can be a beautiful end to a sad, painful life. It is common belief that a person lives until they die, but in Belgium, they are courageously giving people the merciful right to die when they no longer have the strength to live. For Adults, euthanasia has been legal in Belgium since 2002, but in December of 2013, they extended that law to cover youths. The extension of this law to youths called into question the ethics of the extension as well as the ethics of euthanasia

With the passing of the law permitting children to apply for euthanasia, a large amount of backlash and disapproval was to be expected. The main refutation was that the passing of this law will bring about Belgium being famous for “death tourism.” Death tourism, or “Euthanasia tourism” is a term used when a person travels to a country to take advantage of legal euthanasia. Protesters fear that this is what Belgium will be known most for, that people will only want to visit Belgium for legal euthanasia. Fortunately for them, that simply is not possible. To go along with the law, Belgium legislators have set up a list of steps that must be passed for a patient to be euthanized. To start, for all patients that seek euthanasia, they must pass a doctors and psychologists tests to qualify. Also, for children seeking Euthanasia, they must have guardians consent, and must be explained the gravity of the decision they are making. With these guidelines in place, there is no way a person could just ‘visit’ Belgium to be euthanized.

With the Belgians passing this law, the ethics of euthanasia itself were called into question.  Why would anyone want euthanasia to be legal? In America, it seems to be the norm to thing that euthanasia is wrong, that it is just medical murder.  Many see euthanasia as cowardice, and taking the easy way out. That simply isn’t true.  In the eyes of a patient with a terminal illness, euthanasia is much more.

So why would anyone want euthanasia to be legal? With a terminally ill patient, they are going to die as it is, and there is no need to actively kill them.  In his article “THOU SHALT NOT KILL”: A CASE AGAINST ACTIVE EUTHANASIA, Hui Edwin labels euthanasia as “active euthanasia,” and argues that “passive” euthanasia is far more ethical. Passive euthanasia is simply letting the disease take its course and allowing the patient to die. That sounds much more unethical than active euthanasia sounds. Simply letting someone die induces more pain than active euthanasia. When a pet owner sees that their pet is struggling with it’s health, they take it to the vet and have it euthanized. It is seen as a merciful act to end the pets pain. Why cant we extend the same mercy to humans? Edwin argues that active euthanasia is morally the same as killing someone, that it is to direct. But direct is what the terminally ill need.

For the terminally ill, life is a painful struggle.  They must deal with the constant pain that their disease brings.  Euthanasia would be a welcome end to all of this suffering.  In the case of fourteen year old Valentina Maureira, it was her dying wish.  Maureira, who suffers from cystic fibrosis, posted a video online asking her president to allow her to die. “I asked to speak urgently with the president, because I am tired of living with this disease.” she said. She was tired of dealing with the pain. Cystic fibrosis attacks the lungs and makes it difficult to breathe, among other symptoms.  Having seen her brother suffer and die from the same disease, Valentina knew what was ahead of her. With full support of her parents, she made the video to the president, which was viewed by thousands. With Euthanasia being illegal on her home country of Chile, the only thing the government could offer was to pay for psychiatric treatment. This raises another problem with euthanasia being illegal, the only solution involves expensive treatments.

The only real solution to terminal illness is constant use of medicine and experimental treatments, and this approach can be very expensive. According to the article “The Cost of Keeping the Terminally Ill Alive,” in 2009 Medicare paid $55 million just in doctors and medical bills during the last two months of patients’ lives.  It was also found that up to thirty percent of those expenses had no meaningful effect on the patient.  This method of keeping terminally ill patients alive not only just prolongs the inevitable,  it is also is a leading factor in the US’s problems with healthcare.  The worst part of the amount of money being spent in a patients last few month is that it is unnecessary.  Physician Richard Meyer explained that “Modern medicine has become so good at keeping the terminally ill alive by treating the complications of underlying disease that the inevitable process of dying has become much harder and is often prolonged unnecessarily.”  Whats the point of spending all this unnecessary money?  The patient is going to die, it is inevitable.  Why not save time money and suffering and allow the patient to do what they truly want to do, die?

For many cases, euthanasia would not just be a way out or a way to save money. Euthanasia could be empowering.  For someone fighting a terminal disease, knowing that they have a choice can be what they need to keep fighting.  With Euthanasia being illegal, if the patient wanted to take matters into their own hands, their only option would be suicide.  Suicide carries many negative connotations, and would be a dishonorable way for the patient to die.  If euthanasia was legal, it would offer them a light at the end of the tunnel, knowing that if the fight started to go south, they always had an honorable way out. Euthanasia would do more than give a patient a good death, it would give them the freedom to choose their death.  

In my study, I have found that euthanasia is more than a health issue, it is also a human rights issue.  Any country that illegalizes euthanasia takes away a very basic human right, the right to control over their lives.  In an article discussing the legalization of youth euthanasia in Belgium, they refer to it as “the right to die”, and I believe it is just that, a right.  Take the case of Valentina Maureira, she asked her president to allow her to die.  That just doesn’t seem right, needing government permission to die.  Shouldn’t we have the right to control our own lives?  Laws against euthanasia limit rights, freedoms, and legitimate jurisdiction over one’s own life.

Euthanasia is completely misjudged.  While many see it as a form of murder, or as a weak way out of life, it isn’t anything like that. For the terminally ill, euthanasia can be a welcome way out of pain and misery. It can empowering, and give them the hope needed to fight their disease. But it goes further than just that, and should be seen as a human rights issue, that legalizing it would expand jurisdiction over one’s own body. Belgium’s legalizing youth euthanasia is a step forward, one that the rest of the world should follow.

Works cited

Gibson, Charlotte. “Belgium Extends Euthanasia Law to Kids.” Time.com. Time Magazine. Web. 27 Apr. 2015.

Rodriguez, Cecilia. “Legal Euthanasia for Children In Belgium: Will It Trigger Death Tourism?” Time.com. Time Magazine. Web. 27 Apr. 2015. 

Meyer, Richard. “The Cost of Keeping the Terminally Ill Alive.” KevinMd.com. KevinMd, 16 Dec. 2010. Web. 27 Apr. 2015. 

“Chilean Girl Appeals to President to Be Allowed to Die.” BBCNews.com. BBC, 1 Mar. 2015. Web. 27 Apr. 2015.

Hui, Edwin, and W. BENTON Gibbard. “”THOU SHALT NOT KILL”: A CASE AGAINST ACTIVE EUTHANASIA.” Humanehealthcare.net. 2 Nov. 2010. Web. 29 Mar. 2015

The Power of One (Times 8 Billion)

Works of massive collaboration are the only things to set humans and other earthly primates apart. Collaboration has enabled the completion of every wonder in both the ancient and modern world. Millions upon billions of us gather and use a plethora of time on the internet, squandering with social activities and entertainment when we should be achieving greatness. All works of collaboration achieve their goals by taking small works of a large number of workers to achieve monumental progress, like ants building a hill or ancient Egyptians building the pyramids. By utilizing the internet’s full potential we could unlock the ability to quench social and entertainment thirsts along side achieving greatness.

Egypt is a popular place for tourists from around the globe to gather. One of its largest attractions is the Great Pyramid of Giza, otherwise referred to as Khufu’s Great Pyramid. This pyramid is over 4,500 years old and is the last-standing of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.  There are an uncountable amount of people who will travel hundreds of miles just to ogle at this and other massive structures composed of nothing but aged and decaying limestone. All of them will be frozen in time pondering what is the only problem aforementioned structures. We must ask, how could have primitive humans erected such mass structure with the lack of modern technology and tools?  A small percentage of us won’t be able to comprehend the concept of humans creating such monumental structures and hide behind the speculation that the builders had assistance from an “other-worldly” force, namely extraterrestrials. The rest of us spectators will be able to logically deduce the more reasonable solution to such problem. The solution that is the underrated tool of massive collaboration.

A massive portion of our population is unaware of the importance of massive collaboration throughout history. To entertain the concept we can rewind and ask, what is collaboration? Collaboration is one of the most important factors defining humanity’s existence. This tool is a crutch for past and modern architecture, engineering, research, construction, and most other fields of growth. The pyramids weren’t built by a small group of workers overnight. Khufu’s Pyramid was constructed in a matter of thirty years with a workforce of over 100,000 oppressed slaves (Krystek). Although thirty years seems like a long time for even a force of 100,000 workers, we can break this down to put the construction into perspective. Initially, the workers weren’t paid and had little to no incentive or compensation, if anything their incentive was the promised “freedom” upon completion of the pyramid. By this we know the workers didn’t want to do this work. We can assume none of the workers woke up full of excitement and anticipation of being whipped in the desert and pushing literal tons of stone up a 45 degree slope. To the workers they were just creating an over-sized tombstone, not a wonder of the ancient world. But even this fact alone can’t justify the full thirty years for over 100,000 workers. Next we have to realize that each of the 2,300,000 limestone blocks weighed 2.5 tons each, which is approximately the weight of a large truck or SUV.  We also have to remember how the stones weren’t just built up from the ground where the pyramids are. Most of the stones were quarried off-site in places as far as 600-miles away! A 600-mile drive could take as long as 7.5 hours at 80 mph! Transporting then sculpting and finally stacking 2,300,000 SUVs hundreds of miles away from which they came without the use of any mechanical lifts or assists in a matter of 30 years is impressive. This is also considering that when the base was completed each layer after was more and more work; the same progression of work is why the cap, only the top-most portion of the pyramid, took 10 years alone to perfect.

If 100,000 workers with no incentive whatsoever could pull-off such feat then imagine what 3,000,000,000 incentive-driven workers could accomplish! 3 Billion sounds like a lot, like too many people for one project. Too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the soup, right? Wrong! The number 3 billion comes from an estimated 3.091 billion users on the internet at any given time. Statisticians confirm that the number of users on the internet grow at a steady and linear rate or that it even follows a slow but sure exponential curve (Internet Live Stats). These numbers may seem irrelevant until it is revealed that collaboration doesn’t have to be on-site anymore. What if the Pharaoh Khnum-Khufu himself could have out-sourced his laborers, and had a workforce of 30 million (estimated population for circa 3000 BC)? The pyramids would have been completed in a matter of hours, provided it was physically possibly for 30 million people to work in such small space together without getting in the way of one another, or spoiling the soup for that matter. If only there were some way an absurdly large task-force could be set to a common goal without interfering with one-another. Oh wait, there is! It’s called the internet and as mentioned before it has approximately 3 billion users workers, a number that is rising fast.

Collaboration has been and always will be important in achieving any greater goals. Collaboration isn’t a trait unique to humans. Collaboration is a natural strategy of survival and is seen in all walks of the animal kingdom. I can reference mutually-beneficial living organisms who help each other survive (most commonly fish), or a pack of wild dogs who stalk and kill their prey together then share the spoils of hunt, or monkeys that have been observed working together in a laboratory environment to obtain food, or any other examples of teamwork in nature. It won’t matter where it is a reference to because collaboration is in nearly every biome, every kingdom, every genus. Collaboration is natural for a species, or a pack of said species, to survive and thrive. Humans are no exception to this rule.

A more recognizable instance of massive collaboration is one where the workers didn’t even know they were working. The project that is CAPTCHA was developed in 2000 by Luis von Ahn with three of his colleagues at Carnegie Mellon University. Ahn speaks on TED Talks about his experience with CAPTCHA and its successor reCAPTCHA, released just a few short years later. During his TED Talks session Ahn discussed how successful the project was and how “humanity as a whole is wasting about 500,000 hours every day typing these annoying CAPTCHAs”. Ahn wanted to change CAPTCHA in such a way that it took all of the time-wasted and put it towards something for the good of humanity. After some brainstorming, the team came up with reCAPTCHA. This replaced the random pictures of squiggly text with pictures of squiggly text that had significance. They created reCAPTCHA to assist in the process of digitizing books. Ahn moves on to explain that “scanning a book is like taking a digital photograph of every page of the book. It gives you an image for every page of the book. This is an image with text for every page of the book. The next step in the process is that the computer needs to be able to decipher all of the words in this image. That’s using a technology called OCR, for optical character recognition, which takes a picture of text and tries to figure out what text is in there. Now the problem is that OCR is not perfect. Especially for older books where the ink has faded and the pages have turned yellow, OCR cannot recognize a lot of the words. For example, for things that were written more than 50 years ago, the computer cannot recognize about 30 percent of the words. So what we’re doing now is we’re taking all of the words that the computer cannot recognize and we’re getting people to read them for us while they’re typing a CAPTCHA on the Internet” (Ahn). Of course none of this seems to be too secure. What if the reader couldn’t correctly identify the word? Wouldn’t that just lead to books being digitized wrong? No! The ever-so-smart people who designed reCAPTCHA  have thought about this. This program makes certain that input is correct by giving the same prompt to hundreds of people. In this way reCAPTCHA can assume a response to any picture to be accurate when, say, 150 people respond the same way to it.

reCAPTCHA’s story doesn’t end there, and neither does Luis von Ahn’s. Luis von Ahn went further with his team and created the app we all know as Duolingo. Duolingo’s primary objective was to translate the web, specifically Wikipedia, into another language. During the segment on Duolingo Ahn made it clear that to translate 80% of Wikipedia to Spanish, “it would cost at least 50 million dollars — and this is at even the most exploited, outsourcing country out there” (Ahn). He goes on explaining how Duolingo works, stating that beginners would start off getting very easy examples which could be found many places on the Web. Then as the user becomes better, the app gives him more complex examples from the Web. And the same as reCAPTCHA, when enough people answer the same prompt the same way, it  assumes the translation is correct and it helps translate the Web.

ReCAPTCHA was eventually bought by Google thus starting a new chapter in its productivity for mankind. Google added a few more applications to reCAPTCHA, among them is the addition of Google Maps’ Street View pictures into the mix. Instead of a word from a book, an internet user might encounter a road-sign, or a building complex’s street-number, all of which automation couldn’t verify correctly. This helps make Google Maps more accurate and relevant to its rapidly growing user-base. Google even implements data from reCAPTCHA into researching Artificial Intelligence. Yes, Google builds a bot by defeating another bot. The applications of reCAPTCHA may never end, for all we know in five years it may be called REreCAPTCHA and it might help solve mathematical algorithms that mathematicians are pulling their hairs out for as we speak.

Massive collaboration has limitless applications in every field. Using the will-power, openly or subliminally, of hundreds of millions of people could benefit any cause. There are projects which use gamers’ addictions to puzzle-solving to map neurons of the brain. There’s an online strategy game where the user encounters a real-life problem which is poaching in the rain-forests. The gamer is then given the necessary tools, virtual of course, to defend the forests against poachers. Although these tools are virtual they are based off of real life tools and strategies and the most successful strategies used in-game would then be implemented in real-life to protect the actual rain-forests from poachers. If someone proposed a really big project there are two ways he could do it: he could befriend a millionaire philanthropist who would back and financially support his goals; or he could befriend a salesman. A salesman because they would be someone with a pitch who could sell his ideas and make them appealing to the average internet user who might just unknowingly be his next employee. The second option has recently become more readily available to the common person as there has been a recent increase in crowd-funding. Crowd-funding is a tool with a similar object to that of massive collaboration projects. In a nut-shell, people or organizations make a product or company proposition and they share their webpage and get “pledges”. Pledges are essentially donations, or funding, for their proposed projects. In return of these pledges, patrons receive compensation such as a refund or an opportunity to test the product, or receive the first line of working models. This compensation usually scales with how much the donor pledges.

Looking back at the ancient Egyptians, there is a plethora of those who believe the pyramids weren’t exactly built by humans. These people can’t comprehend the fact that humans, like any other creature of Earth, can pool their resources and energy to produce projects that would otherwise take centuries. Chris Skinner is just one of these people who doubts the power of humans who properly utilize massive collaboration. There is an article at this link written and published by Skinner. His sole belief is that Ancient Aliens assisted the Egyptians in building the Great Pyramid of Giza and others. We can tell through his provided “evidence” that his argument doesn’t sit on solid ground.

His first entry is:

You know those big stone structures out in Egypt?  The ones  which were supposedly built to house the remains of dead pharaohs???  The ones you thought were built by the Egyptians?Well, you are wrong!THEY WERE BUILT BY ALIENS!Let’s take a look at some undeniable evidence….

So far it is clear to anyone who reads this that Skinner is passionate in disproving the capabilities of humans. The next body of Skinner’s page is:

First, look at this diagram:

The pyramid is highlighted in red, and its two diagonals are extended beyond the end of the pyramid to the north-east and north-west.  The mass of squiggly lines above the pyramid is the Delta of the Nile River, and, as you can see the two diagonals encase the Nile neatly and entirely.  IS THAT A COINCIDENCE???

Yes,  I’m sure that the way the Egyptians did this was to have someone walk hundreds of miles to the end of the delta and hold a really, really long piece of string while someone walked all the way back to the site of the pyramid.  Then,  those two people stood there while two more people repeated the process on the other side of the Pyramid.  Just so that they could build a big building in such a way that its diagonals lie on those two lines.
NOW THAT IS LIKELY????

Here is what really happened: A couple of aliens, flying high enough over the earth to be able to see where the Nile Delta’s origin is, easily saw what orientation the pyramid would need to be in order to have its diagonals  lie on those two lines.

In response to the first paragraph, the only thing to be said is yes it is a coincidence. I’m not sure where the author is taking his argument, maybe this is building on something. But adding the first paragraph to his argument is a mistake, unless he later provides why the fact that the pyramids diagonals aligning with the delta proved to provide any kinda of benefit to the Egyptians or said “Aliens”.  This is like saying the sculptor of Mt Rushmore needed Aliens flying high above earth to find the cliff big enough for proposed sculpting. It just so happen that the Great Pyramid of Giza was built on the diagonals, that diagram looks to me like it proves that the Egyptians wanted the Pyramid to look-out on to the delta. Following that, the second half is now null and void because since it was a coincidence they wouldn’t have had to measure anything. Again, what would they have to gain by having the diagonals align with the delta?

Skinner then goes on to say:

Second piece of evidence:

The big dark shape on the upper left of this diagram is the great pyramid.  If you look at the compass rose in the bottom right, you can see that the pyramid is lined up exactly with the magnetic North Pole,  a difference of only 16 minutes, or some absurdly small number like that (there are 60 minutes in one degree).  COINCIDENCE?   How could the Egyptians possibly have built their pyramid facing the exact magnetic North Pole without even having a compass?  FYI, a compass was not invented for a few thousand years after the ancient Egyptians were long gone?  IS THAT LIKELY????

This is how it really worked:  Those aliens, abundant in their knowledge and drowning in technology, came along and using their compasses,  they landed on earth and found the actual magnetic north and south poles.  THEN THEY BUILT THE PYRAMIDS!

I don’t think the author has done much, if any, research on the ancient Egyptians. It is a known fact that Ancient Cultures were affixed to the night sky. Their whole lives, mythology, and religions often revolved around stars and astrology. It is easy to navigate at night using a star map with the night sky and an enlightened astrologist of course. The fact that the Pyramid aligns to the north is no surprise considering “the Egyptians were masters of aligning buildings, temples and especially the pyramids to fixed stars, apparently in an effort to bring about sympathy between terrestrial structures and the stars with which they were associated” (Hand, 7). In addition, Egyptians were never, nor are they now “long gone”. The authors evidence lacks solid and factual backing. These are all speculations made by the lack of research and knowledge of these peoples’ capabilities.

At the end of his article, Skinner shotguns more claims which can easily be debunked.

“What about the fact that the Egyptians had not even invented the wheel yet,  but the blocks that they had to carry to build the pyramids weighed about 2 tons each? 4,000 lbs.?  What did they do… use cement?   In fact, they used so much stone, that if you took all of the stone they used and cut it into 1 foot square blocks, it would extend 2/3 of the way around the earth!!!”

I’m not sure where to begin with this one. Even if the Egyptians had wheels or logs to roll the stones on, it would prove to be impractical due to the sand and dust covering the ground. Instead, the Egyptians used “sledges” as a sled, like pulling someone on a sled in snow, to transport the blocks. As for Skinner’s second statement here, the truth seems plausible, such that the stone cut into square-foot blocks would extend two-thirds the circumference of the earth. It’s uncertain how this further disproves anything, however.

“Did you know that the height of the pyramid (481 feet) is almost exactly 1/1,000,000,000 of the distance from the earth to the sun (480.6 billion feet)?”

Did you know that this argument is almost exactly irrelevant? This is almost as vague as the first argument of his article. What would any ancient Egyptian or Alien have gained from this “proof”? If it were common knowledge that all extraterrestrial life forms needed to build a structure one-billionth the distance from earth to the Sun, then this might strike as good evidence. Unfortunately, the distance of the building to the Sun would lead to a different conclusion, one not relating to Ancient Aliens’ involvement.

And finally, my favorite:

If you take the perimeter of the pyramid and divide it by two times the height,  you get a number that is exactly equivalent to the number pi (3.14159…) up to the fifteenth digit.  The chances of this phenomenon happening by sheer chance is remarkably small.  Did the ancient Egyptians know what the number pi was?  Not likely,  seeing as it was a number not calculated accurately to the fourth digit until the 6th century,  and the pyramids calculate it to the fifteenth.

No ancient Egyptian who designed the pyramid sat there in his hut and said “I want the perimeter of the pyramid divided by twice the height to equal x“. The author at this point is desperate for additional “evidence”. He is reading far too much into things that aren’t applicable. Pi was calculated because pi is a number found almost everywhere. In architecture, engineering, even Egyptian pottery contained pi. They didn’t know it, but it was there. Just like science was magic before we knew how to explain it. Even Albert Einstein pitched in on the topic. In her article, “What Makes Pi So Special?”,  Natalie Wolchover writes about how “He used fluid dynamics and chaos theory to show that rivers tend to bend into loops. The slightest curve in a river will generate faster currents on the outer side of the curve, which will cause erosion and a sharper bend. This process will gradually tighten the loop, until chaos causes the river to suddenly double back on itself, at which point it will begin forming a loop in the other direction” (Wolchover).  They didn’t calculate pi by building the pyramid, pi is there because the pyramid was built using the most convenient way to stack blocks. The same way the Mayans and Aztecs built all of their ‘pyramids’.

The author’s evidence supporting his claim that Aliens assisted the Ancient Egyptians in building the pyramids is vague, far-fetched, and almost as if he wanted to ignore the real evidence. The Ancient Egyptians were people capable of such building. It’s not like the Pyramids utilize keypad entry or titanium foundations and electrical lighting. The facts are all there, but Chris Skinner made-up his own abstruse facts to “prove” the Aliens’ involvement.

It is observed that the work force who finished the Khufu’s Pyramid were a select group of slaves. Among them are those slaves who were not healthy enough or too old for work. To add on to that they were oppressed. The only incentive for the workers was the promised freedom they would receive upon completion. Unfortunately their only freedom would ultimately be death. If 100,000 oppressed slaves could complete numerous and monumental Pyramids, what do you suppose 100,000 or even 100 million highly motivated workers could accomplish?

Another work of massive collaboration which could easily be called a defining moment for the human race is the Space Race. It was essentially the sequel to the Cold War and was between the United States and the Soviet Union during the years 1957 to 1975. Prior to this World War II had recently concluded and brought upon us the Nuclear Arms Race which is known as the Cold War. This race resulted in a lot of political drama and sanctions, and put nearly every nation on the brink of war. It also led to the realization of the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (later known as MAD). Basically, everyone at this point has manufactured nuclear weapons, so if one power nukes another, there will be a nuclear retaliation which would only lead to both the attacker and their opponent completely demolished. In essence it was a stalemate. After ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles) were constructed to deliver the nuclear payloads, the world powers basically sat on their stockpiles of missiles and nuclear warheads and said “Well… now what?”. That’s when the Space Race began. If a nation couldn’t control the land or the skies, then they aimed their sights for space.

An accurate date to mark the start of the Space Race is October 4th 1957, the day the first artificial satellite was successfully launched into our orbit. The satellite that is Sputnik was launched by the Soviet Union. Such a monumental event called for Presidential address, and a Presidential address is what we go when “President Dwight D. Eisenhower sounded calm at an October 9, 1957, news conference, five days after the Soviet Union launched Sputnik”. He answered many questions from the public about security and safety, and “when a reporter asked about national security concerns” with the Russian satellite whirling about the world, “Eisenhower tried to dispel any notion that the new object in the heavens should cause alarm. He insisted that a satellite represented a scientific development, not a military threat” (Mieczkowski, 1).

The Space Race is an interesting example of collaboration because it’s an example where something other than oppression pushed the workers to complete their task. This force,  among others present, was fear. Despite Eisenhower’s assurance the people were still skeptical. When Sputnik launched, there was a phenomenon that hit home all around the globe. During this time a man could be in his backyard and see a clear night sky full of stars and the moon with the occasional but rare airplane in the sky. When Sputnik reached orbit it became visible in the night-sky. It circled the Earth dozens of times a day. This became mysterious, inspirational, and frightening all at once to the masses. A man could now stand in his backyard and view with his naked eye a man-made spacecraft zipping across the sky. Was it watching him? Would it fall on him? Could it attack him? These are just some of the common questions asked and debated by the public of this era. Sputnik was a threat to our national security, we just had to compete. This ultimately led to the launch of Explorer I, America’s first satellite, which was a mere four months after Sputnik.

The Explorer I’s completion was a concoction of blank-checks supplied by the government, global panic and fear supplied by the Sputnik, and the resources and brain-power of thousands at NASA. Fear is the strongest driving force when it comes to collaboration. It is my sole belief that one day humanity as a whole will be confronted with a dire crisis, and extinction event. The crisis could be an asteroid whose course provides imminent annihilation, or an accelerated global warming, or any other natural (or supernatural) disaster. When this problem presents itself the only way to fix or ultimately survive the crisis would be a massive collaboration project driven by fear. This will be the bridge between humans now and the humans of the future.

Massive collaboration has always been and always will be the crutch of humanity’s prosperity. It has led to the completion of countless monumental projects including, but certainly not limited to, those mentioned in this essay. The power of massive collaboration will grow just as technology continues to prosper and become more relevant in the everyday life of humans. One day massive collaboration will lead to the next big thing, maybe even the next era of human history.

Works Cited

Hand, Robert. The History of Astrology — Another View. 1 Mar. 1996. Web. 29 Mar. 2015. <http://www.lightforcenetwork.com/sites/default/files/Copyright%201996%20robert%20hand.pdf>

Internet Live Stats. “Internet Users” Internet Live Stats. Web. 25 Mar. 2015.<http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users/;.

Krystek, Lee. “Seven Wonder of the Ancient World: Khufu’s Great Pyramid.” Seven Wonder of the Ancient World: Khufu’s Great Pyramid. Web. 1 Mar. 2015. <http://www.unmuseum.org/kpyramid.htm&gt;.

Mieczkowski, Yanek. “Eisenhower’s Sputnik Moment : The Race for Space and World Prestige.” <http://site.ebrary.com/lib/rowan/reader.action?docID=10656287 >Ebrary ProQuest Reader. Cornell University Press, 1 Feb. 2013. Web. 6 Apr. 2015.

Skinner, Chris. “Aliens Built the Pyramids.” Aliens Built the Pyramids. 30 Jan. 1996. Web. 3 May 2015. <http://www.outerworlds.com/likeness/aliens/aliens.html>

Von Ahn, Luis. “Luis von Ahn – Massive-Scale Online Collaboration.” Genius. Web. 1 May 2015. <http://genius.com/Luis-von-ahn-massive-scale-online-collaboration-annotated>

Wolchover, Natalie. “What Makes Pi So Special?” LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 9 Aug. 2012. Web. 29 Apr. 2015. . <http://www.livescience.com/34132-what-makes-pi-special.html

Vancouver Giving Away Free Heorin 

Vancouver is one of Canada’s more prominent cities. It is full of tall buildings, flashy cars, superb restaurants, world-class shopping and remarkable cultural diversity. The city can be described as spectacular by nature and is stated to be one of the world’s most livable cities. Through the years Vancouver’s crime and drug problem has been on the rise. The cities docks have become a major port for drugs. Drugs are brought in through the docks to be distributed across North America, but some still stays within the city.

The association between illicit drugs and crime in general has been well established by criminological researchers in Canada” (Dauvergne 2013). Studies show that the drug crime rate in British Columbia (province where Vancouver is located) reports the highest rate of drug offences among the provinces. “In 2007, the total drug crime rate in this province (654 incidents per 100,000 population) was more than double the rate in Saskatchewan, the next highest province” (Dauvergne 2013). Amongst all the cities in British Columbia, Vancouver has around 630 drug related crimes per 100,00 population (about 100 more incidents than the next city).

To fight against these pressing issues Vancouver created a program called Insite. Insite is the only legal supervised drug injection site in North America. At the clinic addicts are able to inject heroin under medical supervision and without any harassment from the law. While at the clinic users receive clean needles, assistance to inject, and free heroin. “Insite also works to connect those individuals to a host of health care services, ranging from primary care to addictions counseling” (Mulvenna).

Vancouver created this program as a treatment program for addicts and as a means to lower the cities drug related crime rate. They express that addicts are more likely to get their fix at the clinic instead of getting it on the streets. The program is supposed be a treatment program for the addicts. But its main goal is to lower the crime and HIV/AIDS rate amongst the city. Vancouver isn’t trying to treat the addicts so they can stop using, they are just trying to stop them from committing crimes and spreading disease.

Addicts are unable to live a normal life. Heroin is a very dangerous and addictive drug that dramatically alters a user’s every day life. Addicts aren’t able to keep a job, which then leads to homelessness. They are unable to be a contributor to society; the drug consumes their life. They will do anything they can to obtain the drug. Actions like this tend to lead to crime such as stealing, breaking into homes and sometimes-even murder.

How are the addicts being treated for addiction if they are still using? “Statistics show that 9,259 individuals visited Insite in 2012. Out of those 9,259 individuals, 4,564 individuals were referred to detox centers” (Vancouver Coastal Health). Only less than half of the individuals using Insite’s services are referred to detox centers. “Of those 4,564 individuals only 488 of them were discharged from Onsite detox” (Vancouver Coastal Health). Insite isn’t too successful with the treatment if only 5% of their patients are referred to and complete a detox program.

There are still some addicts using on the streets and in public. Officers are told to take people they’ve caught using in public, within five blocks away from the clinic to Insite.  Even with the clinic addicts are still using drugs on the streets. Unsafe disposal of syringes, as a result of public drug use, are also a significant community concern. A study explored whether the opening of Insite affected levels of public order. The study found that public order in the area around the facility improved after Insite opened. There were big decreases in the numbers of syringes found in public, injection-related litters like syringe wrappers and people injecting in the area around Insite.

According to Scott Thompson, the Vancouver Police Department’s drug policy coordinator and downtown district commander Vancouver’s crime rate hasn’t seen a decrease. Thompson claims that Insite isn’t helping or hurting, it’s just another variable thrown into a complex mix. A study was conducted comparing the crime rates in the year before Insite opened with the crime rates the year after they opened. The study used data from the Vancouver Police Department on drug trafficking, assaults, robberies, vehicle break-ins, and thefts.

After comparing the data, researchers found no statistically significant changes in rates of drug trafficking (124 incidents before Insite vs. 116 incidents after) or assaults and robberies (147 incidents before Insite vs. 180 incidents after). Due to these changes lack in statistical significance they can’t be attributed to Insite. On the other hand, there was a significant drop in vehicle break-ins and vehicle thefts (302 incidents vs. 227 incidents).

Many of the heroin addicts at some point contract HIV/AIDS. Sharing needles is one of the primary ways that HIV and other blood-borne diseases, such as hepatitis C, are spread. People who use Insite are less likely to share needles. In the streets many addicts seek help from other users when injecting. Some users even ask others to inject them into their jugular. Most of the time this involves sharing needles. At Insite, injection drug users are able to learn the safest ways of injecting. If the addicts can inject safely themselves then they won’t require help from others, and won’t share needles. “A study conducted by the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS found that after the facility was opened, the rate of needle sharing in Vancouver dropped from 40 per cent to 1.7 per cent” (Mulvenna). There was also a decline in new cases of both HIV and Hepatitis C and the overall rate of injection drug use had also declined.

Vancouver is doing a good job bettering the city, but what about the well being of the addicts? People that use Insite’s services aren’t being treated for their addictions. They can come in every day and shoot up, never fully getting over their addiction. A long-term drug addict named Kevin Thompson, says he is able to keep a job due to Insite. Now Thompson doesn’t have to go searching for his next fix. He says that without the free heroin he’d have to break into a car or a home. Throughout the day he seems calm and understandable, but still high. These patients are in a constant high and serve as a constant threat not only to the community but also to themselves

In Bradley Campbell’s article ” Vancouver combats heroin by giving its addicts the best smack in the world,” he explains how the city is almost performing some kind of blackmail. In the article Allen Schauffler a Pacific Northwest Correspondent for Al Jazeera states that blackmail is a great way to describe the program. He says, “it’s not designed to get people off the drug” (Campbell). “What it says to these people is, ‘Yep, you are heroin addicts. A certain number of you, the most severely addicted are heroin addicts, you’ll always be heroin addicts, there is no hope of you getting off heroin, therefore let’s provide you with heroin so you are the least dangerous drug addict you can possibly be” (Campbell). “Jim O’Rourke the executive director at the British Columbia-based Vision Quest Recovery Society adds on by saying the city is killing addicts with kindness” (Campbell). Insite is slowly killing their addicts but in a nicer way.

Work cited

• Vancouver Combats Heroin by Giving Its Addicts the Best Smack in the World.” PRI. Bradley Campbel, 4 Feb. 2015. Web. http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-02-04/vancouver-combats-heroin-giving-its-addicts-best-smack-world
• Dauvergne, Mia. “Trends in Police-reported Drug Offences in Canada.” Trends in Police-reported Drug Offences in Canada. Statistics Canada, 6 June 2011. Web. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2009002/article/10847-eng.htm
• “Insite.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insite
• Perreault, Samuel. “Police-reported Crime Statistics in Canada, 2012.” Government of Canada, Statistics Canada. N.p., n.d. Web. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2013001/article/11854-eng.htm&gt.
• Mulvenna, Alexis. “Supervised Injection Sites and Vancouver’s ‘Insite’ Experiment.” The Public Policy Governance Review. N.p., 28 Jan. 2015. Web. http://ppgreview.ca/2015/01/28/whats-the-harm-in-harm-reduction-safe-injection-sites-in-canada/

“Who Defines A Happy Life ?”

Happiness without meaning is a selfish way to live. Think about only putting oneself first for life. Without selfless, kind acts how does one have a true sense of what things are worth? It is impossible for a shallow person to be happy in every sense of the word. There is always something bigger or better that they believe will make them happy, but in the end the void in their life where happiness should be is only filled for a short amount of time. Filled by the thrill of a new object, filled by the satisfaction of knowing that they have the newest and greatest object, therefore they are the newest and greatest. What a person has does not make them what they are.

The popular TV show Real Housewives of Atlanta is a beauty-is-skin-deep illustration of this selfish “happiness with no meaning,” previously mentioned.The show films some of the wealthiest women in Atlanta in their everyday lives. These “high class” women are followed around by cameras showing things such as the work, family, and leisure their lives consist of. Although these women seem to have everything they could ever ask for when the exterior is pulled away the deeper side is shown. No amount of money, job, object, even marriage is ever enough to keep the women happy. Every time something extravagant happens there is always mention of something more extravagant that could of happened. This TV show in itself can prove that satisfaction through fortune, fame, and material objects is never really happiness. In the end everyone always wants more and more to try to fill some sort of void their life has. This type of “happiness” is only skin deep. The deeper kind of happiness comes from meaning in ones life, something these women do not possess. Their materialistic lives take them over, and the objects they own, end up owning them.

Materialistic items, like the ones the real housewives treasure so much, so not have meaning or actual value. They are defined by a dollar sign. Nothing in life has meaning without commitment or devotion. The appreciation of objects is superficial; therefore, it results in despair. However, devotion and commitment relate to meaning on a deeper role when happiness is gained through meaning beyond material significance. We spend our non-refundable time searching for something that makes us feel complete or satisfied. A large portion of us will resort to working our whole lives for money and materialistic belongings while the rest of us come to realize that true fulfillment in life cannot be bought with money, but rather with devotion and commitment. Commitment to something important, commitment to something fulfilling, and commitment to something that makes one feel like they have conquered the world when they complete it. This type of dedication can only come from the strong meaning behind the cause.

It is a counterintuitive that if someone is happy his or her life has meaning. This is not always the case. In many ways a happy person is portrayed as someone who is selfish, a selfish person will most likely not do things to give their life meaning. Psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl once wrote, “Life is never made unbearable by circumstances, but only by lack of meaning and purpose.”(Grewal 2014). Without meaning life would just pass by, nothing left but materialistic memories and uneventful.

Happiness gained from superficial aspects is equivalent to no real happiness at all. Early in the book Fight Club, Tyler Durden talks about how materialism can make one possessive. He states, “We buy things we don’t need, to impress people we don’t like.” This statement can support the idea that superficial, shallow, and meaningless pleasure cannot be construed as happiness. Having meaning in ones life truly defines happiness. As a general idea, happiness is most commonly described as feeling or showing pleasure or content. What makes ones life pleasurable varies from person to person. Is there a difference between long-term happiness and momentary happiness? Can different people be happy in different aspects of their lives? The definition of happiness and meaning are extremely different. “When you ask people what makes their lives worth living, they rarely say anything about their mood. They are more likely to cite things that they find meaningful, such as their work or relationships.”(Acacia Parks). A person who genuinely appreciates life is someone whose life has a lot of meaningful aspects to it. These are the givers, not the takers. The selfish “takers” live lives that are solely based on things they can benefit from. These types of people will never get far in life. A meaningful life trumps a happy life every time.

“Happiness without meaning is characterized by a relatively shallow and often self-oriented life, in which things go well, needs and desires are easily satisfied, and difficult or taxing entanglements are avoided. The meaningful life guides actions from the past through the present to the future, giving one a sense of direction. It offers ways to value good and bad alike, and gives us justifications for our aspirations.” Clifton Parker

Meaning can also be defined in many different ways depending on the person. Meaning is defined as something that is not directly expressed. What gives a persons life meaning is not usually out there in the open for everyone to know, that is what makes it special and worth something. “It’s important to understand that for many people, a sense of meaning and happiness in life overlap; many people score jointly high (or jointly low) on the happiness and meaning measures in the study. But for many others, there is a dissonance — they feel that they are low on happiness and high on meaning or that their lives are very high in happiness, but low in meaning.” (Smith 2013). Out of the two it is clear that meaning is worth more to oneself then happiness.

The push and pull between happiness and meaning and which is more fulfilling can be debated back and forth but when it comes down to it there is cause and effect to each scenario. Superficial aspects tend to be associated with happiness without meaning, therefore superficial results in despair. Devotion and commitment are related to meaning and how ones life takes on a deeper role when happiness is gained through meaning. This is why commitment and devotion result in happiness.

Superficial aspects result in despair. The thrill a Housewife of Atlanta gets when she puts on her new pair of Christian Loubatins, which cost over thousands of dollars, cannot last lifetime. Eventually she will get tired of those shoes, they will get worn down, and all the money she spent on those shoes is just disappears, as if it was useless. This is not happiness. This type of thrill is nothing compared to the thrill a person gets when they spend months working on building homes in other countries, just so a family they did not even know can have a safe place to sleep. This type of happiness, commitment, and devotion for a purpose is the most rewarding form of happiness, because it is meaningful. When someone yearns for something they cannot receive or will not receive this is portrayed as desperation. As stated in previous papers the Real Housewives of Atlanta are a perfect example of showing women who yearn for unnecessary, materialistic items to try to gain happiness. Their superficial pursuit results in a race for who can have the most and who can gain it the quickest. The cause in this demonstration, to gain “happiness” through the newest and best objects money can buy. The effect is a life that is unfulfilling due to the constant disappointment that maybe the best of everything is unattainable. Devotion and commitment are related to the meaning in ones life. Dedication to someone or something can go a long way in and bring prosperous results along with it. When a person is committed to something the strive makes the task worth something. It transforms from just a meaningless act to something that was worked at, achieved, and finally earned. When a person is devoted to a cause the meaning makes the happiness worth something much greater then objects or material items.

Works Cited
Baumeister, Roy F., and Kathleen D. Vohs. “The Pursuit of Meaningfulness in Life.” Homepage.psy.utexas.edu. Web 44 (n.d.): n. pag.
Baumeister, Roy F. “Do You Want a Meaningful or a Happy Life? – Roy F Baumeister – Aeon.” Aeon Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.
Compass, Philosophy. “New Developments in the Meaning of Life.” Philosophy Compass 2/2 (2007): 196–217, 10.1111/j.1747-9991.2007.00061.x New Developments in the Meaning of Life (n.d.): n. pag. Web.
Hagerty, Michael R., and Ruut Veenhoven. “Wealth and Happiness Revised.” Social Indicators Research 64 (2003): 1-27. Web.
“The How of Happiness: Chapter by Chapter.” Adventures in Reading. N.p., 01 May 2008. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.
Jones, Orion. “Why a Meaningful Life Is More Fulfilling Than a Happy One | Big Think.” Big Think. N.p., 13 Jan. 2013. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.
Kauppinen, Antti. “Meaningfulness and Time.” – KAUPPINEN. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.
Marsh, Jason, and Jill Suttie. “Is a Happy Life Different from a Meaningful One?” Is a Happy Life Different from a Meaningful One? N.p., 25 Feb. 2014. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.
Smith, Emily Esfahani. “There’s More to Life Than Being Happy.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 09 Jan. 2013. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.
Wiest, Brianna. “A Meaningful Life Is More Important Than A Happy One.” Thoughtcatolog.com. N.p., 13 Jan. 2014. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.

Reasons behind the Success of Apple Inc.

Apple Inc.’s main business model isn’t selling technology; it’s selling a lifestyle. Their massive success is mainly centered on brand loyalty and ecosystem, an area where the corporation has done an excellent job. But its products aren’t sold based Apple Inc. technology superiority to every other brand in the tech market.

The company’s devices are neither the most technologically advanced nor robust in its market. Apple sells its products more like fashion gadgets than electronic devices. When Steve Jobs the co-founder of Apple Inc. took over the company as a CEO, he had great and innovative vision for the company. He thought that computers should be more technologically friendly, and the design has to be very elegant. Just as the introduction of the Macintosh, the mouse click made it easy for average computer users to surf the web without having to remember codes, the introduction of the iPhone in 2008 changed not only the physical aspect of mobile phones but also how consumers use them. The introduction of the touch screen in mainstream technology for multipurpose use was a great idea to fulfill the consumer needs and ensuring brand loyalty. Apple came up with iPhone when the consumers were tired of seeing the usual and something daring was asked by the baby-boomers. The baby-boomers were tired of the traditional mobile phones, typing ends up hurting the users fingers, the buttons becoming smaller; therefore they wanted something new and never simple to use. The iPhone caused a great advance in technology. Just as the Macintosh made the use of computers very simple, the iPhone changed everything on not only how mobile phones are perceived, but also how we use them. The consumers could now start typing right on the screen, and it only took a swipe to the right to unlock the phone. With the iPhone came features called Apps, a friendly ecosystem that displays Music, Map, Photos, and Videos. Contrary to the traditional scrolling up/down, left/right, and click “OK” on the buttons to access something on the phone, a simple in click on the app right on the screen displays it. This was a huge innovation for Apple; it made cellphones tremendously easy to use. The Millennial generation followed their parents which expanded the Apple culture. Their ability to provide consumers something never seen before was a big risk Apple undertook, but the success of the innovation established an immense trust between the consumers and the company. Another factor that affects the buyer’s decision is the company ecosystem.

Apple Inc. has done well on growing an excellent network of loyal consumers, and integrated them all in a one big group to help maintain present clients by giving them an ecosystem of people with the same interest. It sat up an OS ecosystem, which makes it easier for every Apple user to communicate with each other, share videos and photos. Features like iMessage that allows Apple users to text each other with only the need of wifi or FaceTime which lets consumers make video calls with, iPhone, Macs and iPad. Despite its great success and promising growth, the company lead in the premium market might be in jeopardy in the future.

Apple so far has been leading its competitors because of the allure of its products design, but it seems like this triumph won’t last very long. With the revolution of technology, products are becoming more efficient and less rigid. This is a big problem because consumers would prefer to fully enjoy their money worth. If a six hundred dollars product can break easily, than consumers might rethink about the truth worth of their spending. Product longevity is what will shape the customer’s decision in make a purchase in that industry, a good example would the new iPhone 6 compared to the Samsung S5. Innovators always line up first in the morning to get the new iPhone but this time, Samsung made everybody reconsider their decision. The s5 came out with many excellent features that made many realize that iPhones aren’t necessary the best in the market; the Samsung s5 this time was not only dust proof but also water proof, it had up to 160GB storage capacity compared to the iPhone 128GB, and the battery life on Samsung far superior than the iPhone. Of course this doesn’t mean that Apple will fall because of these few inferiority, iPhone had better camera resolution and screen display than Samsung; but it definitely mean that competition is getting very tight, a technology journalist for BBC and Forbes Gordon Kelly called it the technological bloodbath. Even after questioning their decisions, many still went and bought the iPhone; again this brings us back to well established brand loyalty; the company can also use another strategy by selling only premium products in the future. Therefore it has to specify its market to: publishing, education, and science.  But this will only make the company a trend influence instead of its ambassador.The Apple Inc. workers (pirates) have came a long way and have been focused on design the most since the takeover by Jobs.

In 1984 when the iMac was first introduced, the print ads used arty photos that made it look less like a machine and more like a museum piece. When Apple Inc introduced the iMac, it had three targets in mind: the loyal consumers, consumers using other PC and first time consumer buyers. For the first-time consumer buyers, Apple changed the method of advertising. Buying computer used to be based on processor power, functions and software packages, but it became more about which color the consumers wanted; they had commercial that categorized the product as choosing between “strawberry and grape.” other print ads “yum” and “iCandy.”

Fashion and consumers connection to machines have always been the goals for Apple. In 1999 after apple introduced five more colors to its iMac,  they created a commercial featuring the five colors spinning with the song of the Rolling Stone “She’s a rainbow.”  One of the Apple products that emphasized fashion was the iPod.

Steve Jobs mentioned that the sale of iPod “should also help introduce Windows users to Apple’s clever and stylish designs, like the use of the screen as keyboard or swiping on the screen to unlock, thus encouraging more users of phone with buttons to adopt the iPhone when it came out. The design on Apple computers like the 3D presentation of the apps made PC users to switch to Macintosh computers.” after the iPod, Jobs predictions were right. To our these days, Apple products like iPhones, Macbooks became a must have. Only one out of all my friends at Rowan University isn’t an iphone user.Another design that brought Apple much success was the iPad.

The iPad was a great innovation, combining the features from the iPhone and the Mac. The size was perfect for people that are mobile, it is useful for office work and can be used as a great tourist tool for like: pictures, recordings, music and many other things. But the latest of Apple product is the complete representation of Apple as a fashion brand, the Apple watch. The new technology also takes a further step toward one of the companies goals; making technology friendly.

The product has been on the spotlight the past months, it has many innovators that can’t wait to purchase the product and the late majority is waiting on the smallest drop on the prices. One of Apple product innovator Sean Udall, also CIO of Quantum Trading Strategies and author of The TechStrat Report, told Benzinga, he has been looking for a smart-watch and now thinks he finally found it. These were his exact words on comparing the watch to the previous ones, “The difference is, this watch looks good! The styling looks good. There’s a ton of band choices. I’m actually really impressed with the look of the watch.” No where in his interview, he mentioned the superiority in technology. Don’t get me wrong the Sapphire glass on the Apple watch was a great move, but this doesn’t explain why in February 2014 Samsung Gear was said to have only 2millions sales while Apple Watch has already a prediction of 20millions sales by the end of 2015. This is a great innovation and Apple Inc. needs this type of innovation very often for the future of the company.

It is great to be creative with design and innovations but technologically, big names like Samsung and Microsoft are already catching up on Apple in the market and Samsung is an even bigger company than Apple. Apple inc. only beats those companies because of their understanding of the modern adopted design. But if there is anything that time teaches us is that fashion is an art that changes momentarily. It’s an art that keeps evolving from the most daring abstracts, it’s not fashion if nobody tells you the piece is not ordinary. But with this generation growing, it won’t be very hard for other companies to find those kids that think totally out of the box, Apple called them “Pirates.”

Work Cited

ValueWalk: Apple Watch Vs. Samsung Galaxy Gear. Chatham: Newstex, 2015. ProQuest. Web. 29 Mar. 2015.

Gideon, Tim. “The Best Apple Product Alternatives.” PCMAG. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 May 2015.

Canada, Alonzo. “Take A Lesson from Apple: A Strategy to Keep Customers in Your Ecosystem.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 11 Dec. 2012. Web. 06 May 2015.

The Place I Know

In African-Americans the concept of group identity is more related to family origin than to the place of birth and the contribution of the African-American group in American history. The United States was build by immigrants; therefore, according to Aisha Harris in her article  “Where I’m From,” it is usual to find kids saying that their grandparents “had come to America at some point from Ireland, or Italy, or Greece.” Nevertheless, we do not label those kids as Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans or Grecian-Americans, but as White. Unlike White kids with foreign descents, Black kids are labeled with their ancestral origin by calling the black kids African-Americans.

A lot of African-Americans cannot relate to their ancestry from Africa because, as stated by Harris, their ancestors “were brought here against their will and any records of their origins had long since been lost.” Therefore, most African-Americans are just Americans or Black. According to Harris, she is African, genetically speaking, because her father took an ancestry DNA test that traced his roots to Nigeria. Nevertheless, Harris does not consider herself “Nigerian-American, or even African-American. Where I’m from is America—who I am is a black American.”

African-Americans should not be identified with their ancestral origins because the culture of Blacks from Africa is different from the culture of Blacks from America. Some Black Americans do not speak the same language as Africans from the same place of their ancestors. Examples to follow are the Caribbean islands, which mostly are composed of people of ancestry from Europe and Africa; however, after mixing and lost on the track of the origin of their ancestry, everyone is called the same. For instance, Cubans are not Cubans of African decent or Cubans of European decent, but Cubans.

Nicholas Payton in his article called “I Ain’t African-American, I’m Black: Nicholas Payton,” provides his definition of an African-American. According to Payton, “Anyone who moves to America from Africa and receives U.S. citizenship is African-American.” He is black because “Black, like White, is not a skin color, it’s a term of cultural identification. It [identity] has to do with how you are perceived in this world and where you fit in. Being African-American is a label, being Black has to do with acceptance.” Additionally, Payton implies that is not necessary to be a descendant of slaves in the United States to be African-American that indeed is possible to be White and be an African-American. People who come from Africa and become citizens of The United States are the real African-Americans. Payton explains that the actress Charlize Theron is an African-American who is White but comes from Africa, Moreover, Payton makes the comparison between Charlize Theron and the Black actress Viola Davis, where Charlize is more African-American than Viola Davis because Davis is only related to the American culture.

What differentiates an African-American from a Black American, according to Payton, is that Black Americans are part of the construction of the United States and have “cultural ties to slavery and the racial oppression of pre-civil rights America.” Therefore, Payton along with Morgan Freeman find the Black History Month “ridiculous” because there is not a White History Month, which by its absence implies that Black History is not “American History,” but “African-American History.”

Others that have a hard time getting their true identity, the one they accept, are the Dominicans descendants of undocumented parents in the Dominican Republic. According to Findlaw, an innovator for solutions to law firms, “In most situations, any child that is born in the United States or one of its territories will automatically receive American citizenship.” Nonetheless, since 1929, unlike the United States the Dominican Republic does not provide the Dominican citizenship to Dominicans descendants of undocumented parents. People like Harris, who consider themselves as part of the place of birth and the only place they have been their entire life, are being denied of their identity in the Dominican Republic. In 1929 a new amendment to the Dominican Constitution was made, which stated that in order to be a Dominican at least one parent had to be Dominican regardless where the baby was born. Nonetheless, after stating who was Dominican in the constitution, the government kept giving documentation to anyone born in the country of undocumented parents. Many Dominicans of international descendent, which parents without documents thought that giving birth to them in the Dominican Republic automatically provided Dominican citizenship to their children, now are being considered “stateless” by the sentence TC 0168-13. Denationalized citizens face lack of opportunities and deportation to their ancestral native country; because by law they were never Dominicans. Now, jobs, education, health insurance, getting married, the right of ownership are privileges taken away.

The nationality of the place we were born and raised seems as a right we should all have. On the other hand, the constitution of a land should not suffer any violation as long as amendments of such constitution are not made. Fabian Del Orbe implies that, in the Dominican Republic, “ ignoring an existing law, does not free the duty and obligation to fulfill it.” However, Del Orber fails to address that the government is responsible to avoid that the constitution is neglected.

The people should not suffer the consequences when the government of a country does not follow the constitution. As an excuse, the Dominican government in 2014 came with the law 169/14, which “provides for special arrangements for people born in the country, entered illegally in the Dominican civil registration and naturalization” because “ the Constitutional Court showed a deficiency of the Dominican State that lasted over time and spread throughout the country, which caused a number of people born in the Dominican Republic received the Dominican State’s own documentation that made presume that was Dominican nationals,” after 1929, “based on which developed their civil life with certainties and specific expectations based on that condition.”

If the Dominican government had initially followed the Dominican constitution, now the children and grandchildren of any undocumented parents, who migrated to the Dominican Republic after 1929, would not be facing deportation and lost of their Dominican nationality. Del Orbe brings a good argument by implying that the ignorance of the law does not justify its violation. Nonetheless, if who are responsible to maintain the law failed, we cannot make people who were victims of the negligence of the Dominican government pay. A law like the 169/14 is not the way of fixing the life of the victims, time to fix the nationality is not needed, but the nationality that was once given by the government.

The most prejudiced citizens by the sentence are the Dominican of Haitian descent, who without knowing anyone in Haiti, many don’t even speak the Haitian creole, are going to be deported. With the sentence TC 168-13, thousands of Haitians are being deprived of Dominican citizenship. According to the anthropologist doctor Jorge Duany, the sentence is not designed to discriminate anyone; however, its practice does have a major effect in the Haitian population in the Dominican Republic. As in the Dominican Republic the concept that “Haitian immigration affects the wages of the Dominican workers and contributes to increasing levels of poverty in the Dominican Republic” has always been the most used excuse why the Dominican population supports the sentence. However, Caribbean nations react negatively to Dominican Republic’s actions, and so are the Haitians in Haiti.

Caribbean Community (CariCom), which is an organization that provides a partnership with Community institutions and groups in the Caribbean “toward the attainment of a viable, internationally competitive and sustainable Community, with improved quality of life for all,” establishes that only 6.937 Dominicans with Haitians descent could take benefit from the extra time to apply for the Dominican nationality that the Dominican Republic provided to Dominicans descendants of undocumented parents with the law 169-14. Therefore, more than 100, 000 people are in danger of deportation to Haiti with the Sentence TC 168-13. As a result, CariCom had decided not to incorporate the Dominican Republic because of the violation of the human rights that the sentence TC 168-13 makes.

More forward the National Federation of Dominican Transportation (Fenatrado) is experiencing the frustration of the Haitian community towards the sentence. The truck drivers who import products from the Dominican Republic to Haiti have been attacked by Haitian citizens with stones and hard objects thrown to the trucks. The groups of Haitian rebels have overpowered the Haitian soldiers who are responsible for the safety of the truck drivers. Therefore, the truck drivers “will be forced to suspend cargo transport to the neighboring country, until the Haitian and Dominican authorities to agree to guarantee the safety of vehicles, drivers and loads transported;” as a result, Fenatrado is now experiencing the results of the mass- hysteria caused by the sentence.

The Sentence is not only affecting the Dominican Republic internationally, but is also opening more doors to corruption in the country. According to Fabian Del Orbe, the sentence also contributes to the reinforcement of Companies who break the Dominican Laws. According to the labor Code Article 135 ” 80%, at least, the total number of workers in an enterprise must consist of Dominicans.” However, “ Illegal immigration promotes large and small construction companies, agricultural enterprises, tourism, hotel companies and many other companies that consistently violate Dominican laws by engaging the services of foreigners without work permits and employing foreigners in greater percentage of 20 % of its payroll employees.”

The director of migration of the Dominican Republic, Jose Ricardo Taveras, says that everything is ready to initiate the deportation process, after the completion of the National Plan of Regularization of Foreigners, in June. Taveras expressed that the process deportation expects to deport:

“First the foreigners of other nationality in the country to leave voluntarily; then, who does not leave voluntarily, through various mechanisms established by law, will be referred to their country of origin.”

The International Court of Human Rights (IACHR) is an organ of the Organization of American States (OAS), whose mandate is of the OAS Charter and the American Convention on Human Rights. The IACHR had found the Dominican Republic as “guilty to alleged violations of foreigners and Dominicans of Haitian descent were deported to Haiti without guaranteeing their rights,” in 1999-2000. Now ask the Dominican Republic to,

“Take steps to rescind any rules of any kind action, constitutional, legal, regulatory, administrative, or any practice or decision or interpretation that establishes or has the effect that the illegal residence of parents foreign motivate the denial of Dominican nationality to girls and boys born in the territory of Dominican Republic.”

“Adopt domestic legal measures necessary to prevent the Constitutional Court TC / 0168-13 of September 23, 2013 and the provisions of Articles 6, 8 and 11 of Law 169-14, issued on 23 May 2014, continue to produce legal effects.” In other words, everyone born in the Dominican Republic will be a Dominican.

“Adopt legislative measures, including, if necessary, constitutional, administrative and other measures necessary to regulate a procedure for birth registration should be accessible and simple, so as to ensure that all persons born on its territory they can be registered immediately after birth, regardless of their ancestry or origin and immigration status of their parents.”

“pay the compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, reimbursement of expense and expenses.”

With the process of deportation the Dominican Republic will not follow the petitions made by the IACHR, which stated that in the case of not following such petitions “undermine the protection that persons subject to the jurisdiction of the Dominican State have before international bodies for the protection of human rights.”

With the deportations the Dominican economy is also being thrown into the game. According to former Haitian diplomat and government official, Edwin Paraison, “Dominican Republic is the most caring in the world to his neighbor, Haiti, for the contributions in health and education, while Haiti is a country on the planet that most contributes to the economic life of its counterpart.” Paraison implies that the Dominican Republic is attempting against its own benefit with the anti-Haitian concept. Dominican markets on the border benefit from the food dependency of Haiti, more important, these trades are crucial for producers and Dominican families. Haiti not only represents a market of about 2 billion annually to the Dominican Republic but it provides substantial capital whose amount, according to the Science and Arts Foundation, since 2007 over one billion. At the moment, according to Paraison, with the “new projects in the hotel, catering, real estate land and air transport, free zone and distribution of petroleum products among others” the capital should be doubled for the Dominican Republic.

Of course the Dominican Republic is an independent country that can make its own decisions. Nonetheless, the protection of human rights should be a priority for the country. Trades with its major consumer should be secured because in the case that the Haitian country makes treated with other producers a lot of Dominican families and businesses will be in danger. The Dominican Republic has to look for solutions to fix the legal status of those Dominicans descendants of undocumented parents who once were considered as Dominicans. Otherwise, the Dominican Republic will keep suffering by the decisions of the international opposition to the sentence TC 168-13, which violates the human rights of the citizens and produces a mass-hysteria at a national level.

Work Cited

Acento. “Caricom expresa “seria Preocupación” Haitianos República Dominicana.” Acento. N.p., 03 Mar. 2015. Web. 05 Apr. 2015.

CariCom. “CSME.” CARICOM Secretariat Mission Statement. N.p., 2011. Web. 04 Apr. 2015. 

“CIDH Condena Sentencia Del Tribunal Constitucional De República Dominicana.” CIDH Condena Sentencia Del Tribunal Constitucional De República Dominicana. Ed. OEA. N.p., 6 Nov. 2014. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

Del Orbe, Fabian. “Re: Mi Opinión Resumida En El Caso De La Sentencia 168-13, Del Tribunal Constitucional.” Web log comment. Francomacorisanos, 23 Oct. 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Guzman Molina, Ubaldo. “La Inmigración Haitiana Afecta Salarios Locales.” Hoy.com.do. Hoy, 04 May 2012. Web. 05 Apr. 2015.

Harris, Aisha. “Why I’d Rather Be Called a Black American Than an African-American.”Slate.com. Slate, 29 July 2014. Web. 01 Mar. 2015.

Leclerc, Isabel Leticia. “Migración Está Lista Para Deportaciones Cuando Concluya El Plan De Regularización.” Listindiario.com. Listin Diario, 15 Apr. 2015. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

Listin Diario. “Fenatrado Denuncia Nuevas Agresiones a Camioneros En Haití.”Listindiario.com. Listin Diario, 25 Mar. 2015. Web. 05 Apr. 2015.

Paraison, Edwin. “La Realidad Insular.” Acento. N.p., 11 Mar. 2015. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

Payton, Nicholas. “I Ain’t African-American, I’m Black : Nicholas Payton.” Nicholas Payton. WordPress.com, 26 Feb. 2012. Web. 01 Mar. 2015.

Telemundo. “Fallo Dominicano Afecta a Haitianos — Telemundo 47.” Fallo Dominicano Afecta a Haitianos — Telemundo 47. N.p., 29 July 2014. Web. 05 Apr. 2015.

“U.S. Citizenship Through Parents or by Birth – FindLaw.” Findlaw. Thomson Reuters, 2014. Web. 26 Apr. 2015.

Vargas, Lauterio. “La CIDH Condena a RD Y Le Ordena Anular Sentencia.” El Caribe. N.p., 23 Oct. 2014. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.