tokiokobayas's blog

    The other day, I was invited over to my caucasian friend’s place back in Lowell (his race is important in this context). When we stepped in through the front door, I was in the process of taking off my shoes when he told me “oh, don’t take your shoes off, we don’t do that here”. This was the first time I had never taken off my shoes inside someone’s house. I was a bit thrown back, and asked “Why? Do you not take your shoes off?, and he replied with “No, not really”. I was still a bit surprised but did not want to be disrespectful, so I walked through the house with shoes on, and could only think about how gross it was. When we walked into his furnished basement, I couldn’t believe how dirty the carpet was as it was covered in dirt stains. As we hung out a bit more, I could not process the idea that I still had my shoes on. I then had to ask “do you sleep with your shoes on?”, to which he replied with “of course, you don’t?”. I couldn’t believe it. The amount of bacteria that is on the streets and outside, and the idea of bringing that inside, and tracking it everywhere in the house seemed disgusting to me.

    Domestic horses, also known as Equus caballus, display multiple behaviors based on the conditions they are exposed to. Horses tend to graze for long periods of time throughout the day (Goodwin 2010), and their environment has a major impact on the way they tend to graze (Lewis 1989). In warmer weather, the horses graze in various spots on a field in comparison to colder weather, where horses huddle up and graze in a couple of selected spots. It's estimated they graze about 15-17 hours per day (Sharon 1986). Horses tend to “stick together” and live in groups (Lansberg 2018), as horses feel more protected in these settings due to having more companions that are willing to look out for predators and food. This ultimately results in a greater chance of survival. Groups also allow a source of protection for one's resources such as: food, water, and territory. A common behavior that has been observed amongst young “colts” or male horses, is that they tend to follow the older horses within the pack (Hill 2010). This behavior allows colts to learn behaviors from their older peers while at an early age. These examples demonstrate that depending on their surroundings, domestic horses behave differently based on their environment and what stimuli they are exposed to.

Think of knowledge as if it’s a currency. Teachers are those who are very wealthy in knowledge, therefore are of a wealthier ‘class’, compared to students who are much less knowledgeable about the subject. When teachers are able to pour in a lot of effort and pass on their knowledge, they are helping everyone around them rise up to become better. The net benefit is overall positive, and society (the classroom in this metaphor) is doing better in the end. Of course, this metaphor falls off a bit where the teachers aren’t actually losing anything besides time. They still retain their ‘currency’, they’re just losing a different form of it that’s equal amongst everyone in society (time). I think it’s an interesting way to view teaching, since I don’t think the two are ever looked at as if they’re similar. Of course, politics should stay out of the classroom which is also why this metaphor is probably not that popular, but it definitely is something interesting to think about.

    For most students, when asked what someone’s GPA stands for, the most common answers include “the average of all your grades”, and “how smart someone is”. The first statement is inherently true, as GPA stands for “grade point average”, but how well does the second statement hold? Does someone’s GPA accurately represent how smart someone is? A value for someone’s GPA comes from how well they do in all their individual courses, whether that be maths, english, history, science, etc. The average from all these classes is then weighted then checked to see how well a student is able to perform on average, in any class. Yet is that testing how smart a student is? I personally, would argue no. Your GPA only represents how well you fair in a variety of classes, not necessarily how smart you are. In what class gauges your ability to approach unknown variables and seemingly connect them in creative ways? The Remote Associates Test is a test that is commonly used in order compare different students and their ability to be creative against one another, yet in what class is this test commonly used? As a reader, have you ever heard of this test until now?  The test gives 3 words that are associated by a 4th, and as the test taker you are to try and figure out the 4th word. For example, the 3 given words could be light/break/dream, and you would have to figure out the 4th word. Give up? The 4th word is ‘day’ (Daylight, Daybreak, Daydream). Tests like these in my opinion really do test an individual’s creativity, and it baffles me that tests like these aren’t used more often in school to accurately determine how smart a student is.

Domestic horses also known for their biological name, Equus caballus, display multiple behaviors based on the conditions they are exposed to. Horses tend to graze for long periods of time throughout the day. (Goodwin 2010), and the environment has a major impact on the way the horses tend to graze (Lewis 1989). In warmer weather the horses tend to graze in various spots on the field in comparison to colder weather where the horses huddle up and graze in a couple of selected spots. It's estimated they graze about 15-17 hours a day (Sharon 1986). Horses tend to “stick together” and live in groups (Lansberg 2018).  In groups settings, horses feel more protected cause their are extra eyes that are looking out for predators and food. This results to a greater chance of survival. Groups also allow a source of protection for one's resources such as: food, water, and territory. A common behavior that has been among young “colts” or male horses, is that they tend to follow the older horses within the pack (Hill 2010), demonstrating the previously stated behavior. This will allow the colts to learn and understand the ways of life while at an early age. “Fouls” or female horses, tend to nurture their foals for about 11 months. (Crowell-Davis and Houpt 1986). Younger fouls tend to display a numerous variety of behaviors, this is known as mammalian. Horses behave depending on their surroundings and also the environment they are exposed to.

    There was a blind study that was done in order to test whether or not employers are being too harsh with their evaluations in terms of hiring new members via their resumes. The study was performed by gathering a sample size of 10 CEOs/presidents/or managers from various companies, and each one of these people were given 10 different resumes. Each resume had the name, birthdays, schools, and years attended changed without the 10 subjects knowing. Each subject was to evaluate each resume and decide whether or not the applicant would have a shot at a job in their company, without knowing what the other subjects’ decisions were. Out of the 100 total evaluations, only 12% of the resumes were passed as a possible candidate for their companies. The real resumes of each applicant were then revealed, and each resume was the first resume each subject had used in real life in order to start working at their respective companies. The study clearly demonstrated that the expectations for new workers have significantly increased, and that the subjects were possibly “not giving people enough of a chance”. In the end, the study demonstrated the failure of resumes, and how they are a very inaccurate method of representing someone’s ability to work, as well as how the expectations of current society has increased significantly for new workers.

    How would you destroy society as efficiently as possible if you were set on destroying modern society? What if you had the power to shut down Amazon, Apple, and Google--as if they were to fall off the face of the planet tomorrow. Say the databases for all three of these major companies were completely wiped, what would happen? Well for starters, Whole Foods, Ring, Zappos, PillPack, Twitch, and Audible, as well as other companies bought by Amazon would all crash and cease to exist. This would mean some of the largest online retailers, as well as the leading streaming platform will all cease to work. A large portion of the economy will suddenly just come to a halt, and the flow of money would completely flip. Then there’s Google, which own Youtube, Google Maps, Android, and more. With just these minor companies dying out, suddenly a lot of livelihoods built around social media, as well as most GPS navigation systems will stop working. Android phones will stop working, and now everyone with an Android has a lot of their connections cut off immediately. Finally there’s Apple, where suddenly if all their services stop working, then all their phones, laptops, desktops, watches, all would stop working. The amount of people who own either an Android or Apple phone is significant, especially in the U.S. where 86% of cell phone users have either an Android or an Apple phone.

    In modern society, there exists “the game”. “The game” refers to dating, and the term “the game” was a term that was coined back in 1965, as it was the name of a television show. The term quickly grew and is now commonly popular with young adults when used in reference to dating. Everybody has their own way of “playing the game”, but I would argue that the game does not necessarily exist. To view dating and finding a potential partner as sort of a game with rules that must adamantly be followed, is immature in my opinion. If someone enjoys the other’s company, they will make themselves present and make time to incorporate other people into their lives. There’s no game, there’s just that simple law of attraction that exists. For example, a common “rule” young adults seem to follow, is that if someone replies to your text 12 minutes later, then you should wait 12 minutes before responding. This is a childish method of interacting with others, as it takes something like a response time, and someone’s attraction, and assuming a correlation exists between the two when in reality the two are not in relation via causation. Again, if someone’s attraction is valid, they will make the time to interact. The “game” does not contain any rules, it’s just following the flow of someone’s individual method of expressing attraction.

    Radios and TVs seem to slowly be dying as time goes on. A lot less people listen to the radio now that it’s becoming increasingly easier to either plug your phone into the car’s speakers with an aux cord, or to simply connect it via bluetooth. Not as many people these days have a television inside their homes, as watching shows on your laptop or desktop seems to be the more preferred option. Why watch something with your family, when you can each watch something you all enjoy the most at the same time without disrupting the others? These things that were staples from our times as kids, as now slowly become obsolete as console gaming, as well as cable are becoming less and less relevant. Is it possible that eventually, these forms of communication will become so obsolete that television channels will slowly cease to exist? Will radio stations stop existing? It seems like it’s only a matter of time until these things will become completely irrelevant and stop existing all together.

    Currently, the largest eSport based off playerbase is League of Legends, which has a playerbase of roughly 100 million players across the globe. An esport is a team game that is played online, pitting one team against another. While at its very core it is simply a video game, the market for the community is massive. League of Legends’ parent company is called Riot Games, and its company alone is estimated to have a 21 billion dollar net value. The organizations that participate in these huge tournaments as well are very large as well, with some of the top organizations in North America being Cloud9, Team SoloMid, and Team Liquid, each with a net value of 310 million, 250 million, and 200 million dollars respectively. People seem to want to ridicule the scene and its players, but the fact that esports have grown as large as they have is undeniable. Some argue that “it’s only a video game” and that “anyone could do what they do”. While it’s undeniable that it’s simply a video game, to argue that “anyone can do what they do” is a deeply uneducated opinion. That’s like saying that if any regular joe wanted to, as long as he enjoyed playing chess he could easily become a grandmaster.