I plan on going into the insurance industry - I'll be taking my first actuarial exam at the end of September. So, I've been studying intensely. Audio courses, online notes, practice tests, everything. In one of the materials, I ran across the concept of reinsurance.
What is reinsurance? It's when the insurer gets insurance from the reinsurer to transfer risk that a catastrophic event or large loss to someone else.
So... what's the point of this? I suppose, theoretically, it makes some amount of sense. Policy holders buy insurance to transfer the risk onto another entity - so, you pay a flat fee that is roughly the average of what everyone's losses amount to, and in return your risk is absorbed and, if you obtain a loss, it is covered by the insurer. The insurers have risk, too - like large natural disasters, or some other unforeseeable amount of loss. But, still, insurance for insurers? It still sounds a little silly.
Another thought about insurance: why are checkups covered under some policies? Now, many have a deductible which I suppose puts them out of this category, but if everyone had complete coverage, annual checkups being covered would make no sense. Insurance is meant to absorb risk - it utilizes things like the expected loss (total loss divided by the number of individuals) to balance out risk. So, if EVERYONE goes in for an annual check up, then EVERYONE's premiums should rise dollar for dollar directly with that annual check up's cost. It's not a risk, it's a choice. A very good choice to make, yes, but not something that really requires insurance. I suppose there's the chance that having the insurers handle it makes it easier for the hospital to regulate policies,, have a more stable income, and encourages more people to go in (which is a good thing), but it has its negatives. It removes the individual from the money spending process, and allows the insurer to be in control, acting as an unnecessary middleman trying to keep as much money as possible, while the hospital and individual have to follow its rules.
A scenario where this would probably work most ideally: insurance provided directly by the hospital. This is like in Chinese medicine, where people pay the doctor when they're healthy because that means he's doing his job! Likewise, individuals could pay the hospital a flat fee that accounts for a certain measure of annual check ups and policies, plus insurance for necessary risks that arise. This would allow the hospital to run smoothly with a steady amount of funds, optimizing check-up cost in order to most easily absorb the cost of risks while providing the best care possible in order to keep the customers. This makes it more capitalist, but does not put the individual in an "uninsured" heavy risk situation.
I suppose, though, with insurance, you pay for the ability to use different doctors and such. Being a military dependent, it's almost as if we're paying the hospital directly because the insurance covers pretty much everything as long as it's at a military hospital. I don't see why it also wouldn't be feasible for someone who lives in the same place, sees the same doctor for a certain amount of time. I mean, the hospital could act as the insurer and pay emergency room fees if things happen elsewhere. Why do we need so many middlemen?
Read more!
Monday, August 16, 2010
Monday, August 9, 2010
Self Study
A traditional classroom setting usually worked pretty well for me. Sit in class, half listening, looking at the board when something was happening, do homework, repeat. Self study, obviously, is different. I'll try to explain some of the things I've come across in my self study habits.
Now, for the most part, self study doesn't actually mean "learning by yourself." Oftentimes it is by the accompaniment of a book or online course. It just so happens that you have no fellow students to talk to, and none or limited access to a teacher for questions.
I rarely ever asked questions in class, and talking to peers was the last thing on my list to do. Why, then, is self study so much harder?
My answer: textbooks aren't made to be used on their own.
How many times have you heard your teacher say "They text book mentions it, but doesn't explain it well." Why do we use textbooks if they are no good at explaining? Ultimately, I think most of us only cracked them open for a cursory review of formulas or quick notes, and then to do the assignments at the end of each chapter. Most of the learning was done in class.
There are 3 different types of learning: visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. Personally, I'm mostly visual and auditory, though kinesthetic exercise always help solidify things. I found a classroom setting would normally satisfy all styles - as the teacher spoke, using intuitive English to present the argument of the topic, images were drawn on the board to illustrate it, and discovery-aimed homework assignments functioned to deliver the message by allowing the quiet kinesthetic part of my mind to run around a bit.
There is a disconnect in most self study materials when presenting all types of learning. The person giving the podcast is often more accustomed to doing something in person, and therefore doesn't know how to properly explain the concept to illustrate in the listener's head. Oftentimes, I will understand something when the audiocast lecturer just explains what he's drawing so that I can draw it in my head. It's when he says "Let me draw this picture *chalk sounds* this part is this... etc" that I get lost. Perfectly reasonable, on my part. I remedy this by going in search of online lecture notes and pictures. These help some, but they are not precisely aligned with what he is saying, and it is hard to match up "This is the part of the Poisson distribution formula that represents -" when nobody's pointing to it.
Additionally, I'll tune out the speaker when he's going on and on about something that seems to me to be irrelevant. In a classroom setting, this is alright because the picture is still there up on the board for me to understand on my own time. It is not solely dependent on my listening at all times to speech that goes slower than my brain can think.
I'd recommend audiocasts if you don't know where to start. Videocasts are better, arguably best, but not always available. After I listened to a couple of lectures, I started getting lost. I found overview notes for my topic - now, I google each section, get the wikipedia article or lecture notes for it, find some examples, and move on. Sometimes this is easier than others. However, it seems to cover all my learning styles - I'm given directed verbal information about an image through the lecture notes, but also a more elaborate explanation through the audiocast, and a handy summary through my overview notes. The only thing I'm missing are the problems supplied by a text book, but I should also get that sort of thing with the practice tests I plan on taking soon.
You can see how hard and time consuming it is to self study. Imagine what a teacher has to do, gathering these materials and planning out verbal and image guides to your learning! There will never be a substitute for a class that you feel a desire or obligation to pay attention to, but never fear - with MIT OpenCourseWare, with Berkeley's online course audiocasts, with Wikipedia and online lecture notes, you can mix and match your own course. It may look like a plaid shirt with striped pants and mismatched socks, but, hey, at least you're clothed, and there's no underwear on your head. Read more!
Now, for the most part, self study doesn't actually mean "learning by yourself." Oftentimes it is by the accompaniment of a book or online course. It just so happens that you have no fellow students to talk to, and none or limited access to a teacher for questions.
I rarely ever asked questions in class, and talking to peers was the last thing on my list to do. Why, then, is self study so much harder?
My answer: textbooks aren't made to be used on their own.
How many times have you heard your teacher say "They text book mentions it, but doesn't explain it well." Why do we use textbooks if they are no good at explaining? Ultimately, I think most of us only cracked them open for a cursory review of formulas or quick notes, and then to do the assignments at the end of each chapter. Most of the learning was done in class.
There are 3 different types of learning: visual, auditory, and kinesthetic. Personally, I'm mostly visual and auditory, though kinesthetic exercise always help solidify things. I found a classroom setting would normally satisfy all styles - as the teacher spoke, using intuitive English to present the argument of the topic, images were drawn on the board to illustrate it, and discovery-aimed homework assignments functioned to deliver the message by allowing the quiet kinesthetic part of my mind to run around a bit.
There is a disconnect in most self study materials when presenting all types of learning. The person giving the podcast is often more accustomed to doing something in person, and therefore doesn't know how to properly explain the concept to illustrate in the listener's head. Oftentimes, I will understand something when the audiocast lecturer just explains what he's drawing so that I can draw it in my head. It's when he says "Let me draw this picture *chalk sounds* this part is this... etc" that I get lost. Perfectly reasonable, on my part. I remedy this by going in search of online lecture notes and pictures. These help some, but they are not precisely aligned with what he is saying, and it is hard to match up "This is the part of the Poisson distribution formula that represents -" when nobody's pointing to it.
Additionally, I'll tune out the speaker when he's going on and on about something that seems to me to be irrelevant. In a classroom setting, this is alright because the picture is still there up on the board for me to understand on my own time. It is not solely dependent on my listening at all times to speech that goes slower than my brain can think.
I'd recommend audiocasts if you don't know where to start. Videocasts are better, arguably best, but not always available. After I listened to a couple of lectures, I started getting lost. I found overview notes for my topic - now, I google each section, get the wikipedia article or lecture notes for it, find some examples, and move on. Sometimes this is easier than others. However, it seems to cover all my learning styles - I'm given directed verbal information about an image through the lecture notes, but also a more elaborate explanation through the audiocast, and a handy summary through my overview notes. The only thing I'm missing are the problems supplied by a text book, but I should also get that sort of thing with the practice tests I plan on taking soon.
You can see how hard and time consuming it is to self study. Imagine what a teacher has to do, gathering these materials and planning out verbal and image guides to your learning! There will never be a substitute for a class that you feel a desire or obligation to pay attention to, but never fear - with MIT OpenCourseWare, with Berkeley's online course audiocasts, with Wikipedia and online lecture notes, you can mix and match your own course. It may look like a plaid shirt with striped pants and mismatched socks, but, hey, at least you're clothed, and there's no underwear on your head. Read more!
Friday, August 6, 2010
Being a Genius
A friend just posted the following Radiolab clip:
http://blogs.wnyc.org/radiolab/2010/07/26/secrets-of-success/
It's a conversation with Malcom Gladwell about the existence of geniuses.
This post will also explore a little bit of ageism, inspired by the TED talk list the DBBlog posted today:
http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/childish-thinking-todays-tedtalks-playlist/
I'll give you a moment to listen to these while I continue after the jump.
Okay, so most of my childhood has been spent in those gifted programs. (Note that I'm almost always the youngest in all my classes, and I never skipped a grade. My siblings that are older in their classes do worse than me and my sister who are younger in our classes. Obviously, there's more at play here than birth month. But that's besides the point.) Over and over, I get told that I'm a great student, that I've got potential. And you know what?
I fucking hate having potential.
All it means is that teachers love having me in class. It means I'm good at learning, and good at school. It means that, at some point in the future, if I don't become an alcoholic, I'll probably do something with my life.
In short, it doesn't mean much.
What I want to be is a person who has created something, who has made myself known in a sphere of people to be pretty awesome at something, at the very least. And this relies upon me, but adults don't help much. "You're too young to take that class." "That's nice, dear. Go read your book." "That's too much work, and it's risky. Not a good idea." And so I'm sitting here wondering just what WOULD be a good idea. Adults tend to think things more impossible than they really are. They're not risk takers. I need to be a risk taker to become the person I want to be.
Enter the 10,000 hour part of being a genius. Now, there's something to be said about initial resources. One of my talents is being able to figure out how to do anything, and then do it well. It's a very useful talent. And I guess that's why I have potential. But seriously, what do you DO with potential? You find something worth 10,000 of your hours.
I have no idea what that is. We all have hobbies, and I'm no different. I have tons of interests. But I'm not going to spend 10,000 hours knitting. I don't have that kind of motivation for it.
Am I destined for averageitude if I can't find something to hold my passion, or do I have to decide on something and just go with it?
Read more!
http://blogs.wnyc.org/radiolab/2010/07/26/secrets-of-success/
It's a conversation with Malcom Gladwell about the existence of geniuses.
This post will also explore a little bit of ageism, inspired by the TED talk list the DBBlog posted today:
http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/childish-thinking-todays-tedtalks-playlist/
I'll give you a moment to listen to these while I continue after the jump.
Okay, so most of my childhood has been spent in those gifted programs. (Note that I'm almost always the youngest in all my classes, and I never skipped a grade. My siblings that are older in their classes do worse than me and my sister who are younger in our classes. Obviously, there's more at play here than birth month. But that's besides the point.) Over and over, I get told that I'm a great student, that I've got potential. And you know what?
I fucking hate having potential.
All it means is that teachers love having me in class. It means I'm good at learning, and good at school. It means that, at some point in the future, if I don't become an alcoholic, I'll probably do something with my life.
In short, it doesn't mean much.
What I want to be is a person who has created something, who has made myself known in a sphere of people to be pretty awesome at something, at the very least. And this relies upon me, but adults don't help much. "You're too young to take that class." "That's nice, dear. Go read your book." "That's too much work, and it's risky. Not a good idea." And so I'm sitting here wondering just what WOULD be a good idea. Adults tend to think things more impossible than they really are. They're not risk takers. I need to be a risk taker to become the person I want to be.
Enter the 10,000 hour part of being a genius. Now, there's something to be said about initial resources. One of my talents is being able to figure out how to do anything, and then do it well. It's a very useful talent. And I guess that's why I have potential. But seriously, what do you DO with potential? You find something worth 10,000 of your hours.
I have no idea what that is. We all have hobbies, and I'm no different. I have tons of interests. But I'm not going to spend 10,000 hours knitting. I don't have that kind of motivation for it.
Am I destined for averageitude if I can't find something to hold my passion, or do I have to decide on something and just go with it?
Read more!
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
iPhone 4 TV Ads
Have you seen these ads on TV? They focus on the iPhone's capability of "FaceTime", a form of webchat where you can see the other speaker. And I have an issue with these ads. Why? Read more after the jump.
So, here're the links to the ads that I've seen and could find.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niOCmIuts90
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/10/N2Wn7rYSBVQ
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/11/diUjVY8zRJc
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/12/6CRfHl1Glwk
And the longer FaceTime ad:
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/16/R1wbQdVezio
In every single ad there is a girl being shown off. You barely see the man, he's in the lower left hand corner. The exceptions are, of course, the old man seeing his granddaughter (though she, too, is being shown off) and the long-distance couples - the pregnancy related ones aren't in bad taste, and the one with the sign language is moving, but, as a whole, these ads are all about women being eye candy, playing off of society's dictation that women must always look attractive.
The girls all want to be reassured that they're still looking pretty, even though they: got braces; got a hair cut; can't decide what to wear; etcetera. At the end of each of those segments, the woman is reassured by the person on the other side of the line (mostly male, who's amused at the female's discomfort) that she is still pretty, and she subsequently changes her mind about how she feels. In the only conversation between two women (note that the only conversation between two men is about being a father - apparently, that's the man's only desire in these ads, to procreate) it is presumably for the purpose of the woman looking attractive for a date.
The iPhone4 will help you resolve those nagging "Do I look purty?" thoughts of you vain ladies by allowing you to contact your man-influence at any time to get his approval! What better way to share a moment in your relationship?
Read more!
So, here're the links to the ads that I've seen and could find.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niOCmIuts90
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/10/N2Wn7rYSBVQ
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/11/diUjVY8zRJc
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/12/6CRfHl1Glwk
And the longer FaceTime ad:
http://www.youtube.com/apple#p/u/16/R1wbQdVezio
In every single ad there is a girl being shown off. You barely see the man, he's in the lower left hand corner. The exceptions are, of course, the old man seeing his granddaughter (though she, too, is being shown off) and the long-distance couples - the pregnancy related ones aren't in bad taste, and the one with the sign language is moving, but, as a whole, these ads are all about women being eye candy, playing off of society's dictation that women must always look attractive.
The girls all want to be reassured that they're still looking pretty, even though they: got braces; got a hair cut; can't decide what to wear; etcetera. At the end of each of those segments, the woman is reassured by the person on the other side of the line (mostly male, who's amused at the female's discomfort) that she is still pretty, and she subsequently changes her mind about how she feels. In the only conversation between two women (note that the only conversation between two men is about being a father - apparently, that's the man's only desire in these ads, to procreate) it is presumably for the purpose of the woman looking attractive for a date.
The iPhone4 will help you resolve those nagging "Do I look purty?" thoughts of you vain ladies by allowing you to contact your man-influence at any time to get his approval! What better way to share a moment in your relationship?
Read more!
Bored?
Help Gutenberg proofread!
Here's the link:
http://www.pgdp.net/c/
Pretty much, all you do is click through pages and remove headers, put hyphenated words at the ends of lines back together, and make sure there's no typos. It's easy, productive, fun... Definitely worth your time. Read more!
Here's the link:
http://www.pgdp.net/c/
Pretty much, all you do is click through pages and remove headers, put hyphenated words at the ends of lines back together, and make sure there's no typos. It's easy, productive, fun... Definitely worth your time. Read more!
Monday, August 2, 2010
Menstruation
So, I'm in the middle of one of the worst periods I can ever remember. My body just up and decided, "Hey, let me double every symptom I've ever processed and let it loose at the same time! And why not make it last twice as long, too?" So I figure, why not write about menstruation? It's actually one of my favorite topics, and it isn't talked about near enough.
Menstruation is a natural occurrence in people, mostly women. That's right, I said women, not girls. There's a long period of time in our culture when we are neither children nor adults - they call us teenagers. There's not much inherently different between young adults and adults. Every year is another chance to gain new experiences, but that doesn't define what experiences you can encounter. I spent a few years around the ages of 14-16 wondering just when I would be 'allowed' to call myself a woman. I finally decided I was one, and I think any menstruating (or not) person should be able to decide whether to call oneself a girl, boy, woman or man.
As a woman, I'm proud of my menstruation. Not all are, but society goes a pretty long way to make people embarrassed of it. It's painful, it makes us less beautiful, not to mention less sexy, it's a nuisance. You can't go swimming or dance around in white clothes or even get through the day - at least, not without a bunch of products. Do you know about menstrual cups? They've been around for a long time, and they're incredible. Reusable silicone (or latex) cups that are quite comfortable and easy to use, though they have a steep learning curve. Why haven't you heard of them? Because they don't make as much money as the tampon companies, who pay to advertise only their products in magazines. There's a cultural taboo on menstrual blood - it's somehow less clean, and so, clearly, a reusable cup would be disgusting. I've had friends tell me that they're okay with blood art - that is, someone painting with a blood based paint. However they're NOT okay with menstrual blood art. Why the double standard?
I haven't even touched on mood and being a bitch, yet. My PMS tends to make me really sad and prone to panic, exaggerating things like natural disasters and minor hiccups in plans. However, it doesn't really change me that much, and when I realize that it's the hormones, I can reason myself out of whatever I'm crying over. Hormones don't change the fact that I have reasons in my life to stress and cry. For most women, whatever sets her off on her period is something that legitimately irritates her. When a woman is being a bitch, people just chalk it up to PMS instead of fixing the problem. Well, I can be even more of a bitch when I'm not menstruating than when I am, is it the hormones? No, it's because I have reasons to be a bitch.
In my mind, menstruation should be something openly talked about, generally seen as positive (death isn't pretty, but both it and menstruation are necessary for life as we know it), and not used as an excuse for behavior. It has its negative side effects, but those shouldn't be lumped together and written off as some anomaly in life. It's a legitimate part of our lives.
Read more!
Menstruation is a natural occurrence in people, mostly women. That's right, I said women, not girls. There's a long period of time in our culture when we are neither children nor adults - they call us teenagers. There's not much inherently different between young adults and adults. Every year is another chance to gain new experiences, but that doesn't define what experiences you can encounter. I spent a few years around the ages of 14-16 wondering just when I would be 'allowed' to call myself a woman. I finally decided I was one, and I think any menstruating (or not) person should be able to decide whether to call oneself a girl, boy, woman or man.
As a woman, I'm proud of my menstruation. Not all are, but society goes a pretty long way to make people embarrassed of it. It's painful, it makes us less beautiful, not to mention less sexy, it's a nuisance. You can't go swimming or dance around in white clothes or even get through the day - at least, not without a bunch of products. Do you know about menstrual cups? They've been around for a long time, and they're incredible. Reusable silicone (or latex) cups that are quite comfortable and easy to use, though they have a steep learning curve. Why haven't you heard of them? Because they don't make as much money as the tampon companies, who pay to advertise only their products in magazines. There's a cultural taboo on menstrual blood - it's somehow less clean, and so, clearly, a reusable cup would be disgusting. I've had friends tell me that they're okay with blood art - that is, someone painting with a blood based paint. However they're NOT okay with menstrual blood art. Why the double standard?
I haven't even touched on mood and being a bitch, yet. My PMS tends to make me really sad and prone to panic, exaggerating things like natural disasters and minor hiccups in plans. However, it doesn't really change me that much, and when I realize that it's the hormones, I can reason myself out of whatever I'm crying over. Hormones don't change the fact that I have reasons in my life to stress and cry. For most women, whatever sets her off on her period is something that legitimately irritates her. When a woman is being a bitch, people just chalk it up to PMS instead of fixing the problem. Well, I can be even more of a bitch when I'm not menstruating than when I am, is it the hormones? No, it's because I have reasons to be a bitch.
In my mind, menstruation should be something openly talked about, generally seen as positive (death isn't pretty, but both it and menstruation are necessary for life as we know it), and not used as an excuse for behavior. It has its negative side effects, but those shouldn't be lumped together and written off as some anomaly in life. It's a legitimate part of our lives.
Read more!
Friday, July 30, 2010
Things I learnt from the Percy Jackson movie
1. No matter how hard you train, someone will be born better than you
2. Goddesses only have daughters & gods only have sons
3. You can have minority and female characters in a movie, but their sole purpose has to be support or love interest to the white male protagonist
4. Creatures killed in the past just come back to life, and no new ones are ever created
5. Ancient gods and their offspring are stuck in the past and can only use primitive warfare techniques
I hear the books are way better, at least in terms of character development. Read a book! Read more!
2. Goddesses only have daughters & gods only have sons
3. You can have minority and female characters in a movie, but their sole purpose has to be support or love interest to the white male protagonist
4. Creatures killed in the past just come back to life, and no new ones are ever created
5. Ancient gods and their offspring are stuck in the past and can only use primitive warfare techniques
I hear the books are way better, at least in terms of character development. Read a book! Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)