Hypothesis
People who claim being able to identify brands of cola by taste are
usually right
Resources
5 different kinds of cola drinks (Pepsi, Coke, Coke Light, Diet Coke,
Freeway), 5 similar cups, sticky paper, pens, even more paper
Description
So this is something that definitely happened, mainly because I think
things too much and my girlfriend doesn't know when to stop me. The
setup was: we kept all soft drinks at room temperature (to keep the
taste unaltered), and then we split up. In step 1, one of us poured a
cup of each softdrink into a numbered cup, and then left the room. In
step 2, the other one replaced the numbers with different ones (Roman
numerals), and mixed the cup order. This is a single blind experiment,
which is as scientific as we could get without involving third parties.
Then the tasting began, which we did literally blind to keep any effect
from identifying the color of a given softdrink (just in case). The task
was to accurately identify which drink is which. Here are our
highlights:
- Soft drinks at room temperature taste awful.
- Coke light is terrible even when blindfolded.
- The Coke brands were identified without a hitch, while one of us
mixed up Pepsi and Freeway. This points to our hypothesis being
right.
- If you don't think that softdrinks pack enough sugar, try tasting
them at room temperature and blindfloded. We had to implement water
glasses in between, because after the second cup they all tasted
just like pure, unadultered sweetness.
- It is curiously difficult to find Pepsi in Berlin. Seriously, give
it a try.
- It would be quite easy to fake an experiment to prove that people
prefer a certain brand over the other. Just make sure your brand's
drink is cold while the other one is not.
Conclusion and Future work
It is quite possible to identify a brand of cola by taste only. In
future work we intend to repeat the experiment, but this time rating
drinks in order of preference instead, to find out whether we really
prefer the soft drink we claim to prefer.
We also found that the claim "people prefer X over Y in blind tastes"
ranges from a filthy lie to useless at best. This result might come as a
shock to some of our reviewers. We suggest those reviewers to leave
their houses more often.
I was warned. I was told this wasn't a good idea. I mean, even the price
should have pointed out that something was not what it seemed. But no, I
had to go ahead. I had to be cooler than the other guys, and I was
certainly going to prove everyone that you can't go wrong with a Nokia
phone. So I got myself a Windows Phone 8.1 (again), and today I say to
you, that was a stupid choice and I'm stupid for going with it.
I've chronicled in a previous blog^1 how much of a pain it was
to try to develop for a Windows Phone (WP). That alone should have kept
me away from buying a smartphone with a too-good-to-be-true price. But
on I went, tricked by memories of me saying "this is not so bad after
all", carefully ignoring that I only said that before I tried to write
my own app. And here we are again.
This is, step by step, what my experience trying to develop a very
simple app for my (Lumia 530) Windows Phone was like. Yours might vary,
of course, but I'm not betting on it.
-
Install Visual Studio Community 2015 (free), following the Official WP develop guidelines
Problem: all versions that could work in Windows 7 (the one I have) are
deprecated for WP development one way or another: they don't have
required tools, cannot be activated because the servers are gone, or
just won't work. So get Windows 10 and that comes bundled with
itwant
it or
not,
and try again.
-
Update your Windows and Install Visual Studio Community 2015 (free), following the official WP develop guidelines
Problem: the installer doesn't actually install the WP
tools.
Go back to the installer and modify your requirements.
-
Plug your phone to enable development
Problem: you need to unlock your phone first.
-
Sign up to Microsoft's Dev Network to register as a developer to get your phone unlocked
Problem: you need to pay €14, because reasons.
3.1 (Optional) Sign up on Dreamspark as a student to get a free developer account
Problem: the automatic verification process is broken. You need instead
to send a copy of your ID, your student ID, and a transcript of your
grades to Microsoft over unencrypted email. But don't worry, this data
will be destroyed after they use it. "Anna" promised me so over email.
-
Start Visual Studio, create your first project, and add a couple text fields
Problem: bugs! The auto-complete is buggy, running my app once would
force me to restart every time, and adding a control on the GUI while
the text cursor is in the wrong place can (and will) erase every other
control. But hey, at least we are finally developing something.
-
Add a "select date" field to your project
Problem: you need the DatePicker control to do this, but it's not
included - I guess people don't select dates in phone apps. You have to
follow several
steps
to get it working. However, as there's a library incompatibility
somewhere, you'll get stuck
anyway.
If you have been following all the steps you'll notice that, after
several GiB of downloads and a lot of hours spent on internet forums, I
have not yet managed to finish the first screen. I spent three days
trying to get things running, which is the time I budgeted for the whole
app, I'm out €14, and yet I haven't even managed to add a control that
should have been there anyway. I also gave Microsoft quite some money,
along with a lot of my personal information.
But the worst part is that I knew this is what development would be
like, and yet I insisted on giving it another try. This is why I'm an
idiot, and if you think your experience will be any better, it is my
opinion that you are deluding yourself too.
Listen to my advice, dear reader: Windows Phone? Not even once.
Footnotes
^1 As of now I haven't restored the backup anywhere, but once
I do you should see a link to that post here.
After my last blog post
arguing that advertisers should fall on a well and die, I've given the
issue some more thought. After all, how would this little blog survive
without ads? How would I keep up my product reviews without advertisers
sending them to me for free?
Therefore, I came up with a plan to save the advertising industry from
the scourge known as "ad-blockers". It's not precisely cheap, but we can
still make it work in volume.
First of all, the Central Bureau of Advertising (or similar agency) has
to announce publicly that they intend to make a raffle. The prizes have
to be pretty good - The main prize should be at least a car, and the
minor prizes should be iPhones (or even better, access to a
yet-unreleased version), tablets, smartwatches and the like. You'll need
a lot of them, so this is the expensive part. Ad agencies have to create
quite a buzz, but then again, that's what they do for a living anyway.
Once we've assembled what is essentially the coolest contest on Earth,
we announce the rules. In a nutshell, they will be:
- Everyone is allowed to claim a prize
- Winners will be selected via ads, served through the usual channels.
- Other than reading "you've won", there's no requirement about what
the ads will look like
- The campaign will go on as long as there are prizes left. New prizes
can be added at any moment
Here's the genius part: the winning ads will look as sketchy as
possible. I suggest flashing gifs straight out of the
90s. Think about it: if the buzz for the campaign
is high enough, we won't just have thousands (millions?) of users
disabling their ad-blockers; we'll have effectively trained them to
click on anything, no matter how suspicious it looks! All you need is to
drag the contest long enough for little Johnny to think "I wish I could
disable the ads, but then I might miss my chance to win". Once smaller
companies start running their own contests in the same way, it's game
over for ad-blockers.
There are of course some details to sort out, but I think you get the
main idea. Some people will argue that this is dishonest, and that will
lead to thousands of virus infections from rogue ads. Don't listen to
these people: it's not your problem if some schmuck fails to protect
his/her computer, and then again, if you cared about "dishonesty" your
industry wouldn't be in this problem anyway.
I'm confident you'll find my scheme worth trying, and I hope this will
clear any remaining bad blood between us. No need to thank me.
One of the most enjoyable aspects of gaming for me is to try and pretend
I'm the protagonist. That includes making choices the way I'd do them in
real life. Of course, I understand that games are escapism, and I'm not
blaming those that use games as an opportunity to murder pretty much
anything that can be murdered. It's just not my style. I'm more the kind
of gamer that's constantly being chased around by the guards I didn't
kill because they didn't do anything.
Having said that, I'm having trouble with Angry Birds. I know, I
shouldn't expect moral lessons from what is essentially a group of
suicide birds bombing an enemy. But am I the only one who has trouble
with a game that asks you to bomb a playground, including the kids
playing there?
Did you enjoy committing a crime against humanity? Do you need more
genocide? Then good news! You can bomb the skate park, somebody's house,
and even a cemetery. Not only you get to kill your enemies again, but
this time you can get their friends and family too!
Maybe it's because I'm having a bad day. Maybe it's because I'm putting
too much thought into it. Maybe it's because I'm sick and tired of the
phrase "collateral damage", or maybe I'm just missing some black humor.
But in any case, I found out I can't bring myself to finish the game.
I hope that says something nice about me.