Monthly Archives: March 2014

The Ethics of Care Vs. The Ethics of Competition

Both Carol Gilligan and Lawrence Kohlberg fight for right. As Gilligan fights for empathy, nonrestrictive rules, and productivity through bonding, Kohlberg fights for justice, structure, and loyalty. Kohlberg would side with T&T systems because it is more systematic to have a hierarchy chain. Keeping people from the bottom of the curve would harm productivity by having incompetent workers attempt to reach the goals of the company and the code of ethics, but the system designed for structure, loyalty, power, and competition cannot flourish innovative ideas.

Our brains are constructed to use fewer and fewer neuropathways as we get older in order to generate faster, more rigid, structured answers and decisions. It explains while children are extremely creative, and by the time we reach the age of 50, we have set morals, personal preferences, and appeals. If we adopt Kohlberg’s ideology of structure, competition, and justice, we lose the capability of innovation. Ideas are not stimulated on their own. If you were locked in your office until you are able come up with the next smartphone design to make your company millions, there would be a tombstone in the front of your office desk. Human interaction allows those neuropathways to regrow and adapt a newer perspective of reality. Sociology studies have proven that babies can only learn from human interaction. Without interactions, they would never understand what language, morals, or basic physical movements. We aren’t babies anymore, but human interaction is the fundamental structure of learning. It’s the only thing all humans have in common. WIthout human interactions, the concept of thinking would not exist. Human interaction is the nourishment industries and companies need to survive.

In Kolhberg’s system, there is interaction, but the stress, anxiety, and restrictions are the core inhibits to creativity. Gilligan’s system achieves creativity, yet lacks the structure and power required to hold a well-oiled productive team together. There needs to be both a reward and punishment for individual actions. The majority of higher educated workers like engineers, scientists, and writers value knowledge and intellectual aspirations over monetary value. However, at the end of the day, knowledge isn’t going to get food on the table. There needs a greater incentive to drive workers to meet the requirements individually instead of only “letting down team members”. Team members will cheat and become winners as others are set losers for the sole purpose of being the victim of the socialist system. The most ideal system would be in an environment where Gilligan’s team connection and creativity can flourish in a structured, juristic system free of excess stress and failure.

The Ingenuity of The Otter Box

Apple’s surge with the Iphone in the last year made a renown impact on the stock market. Traders were viciously eager to see how the last design Steve Jobs was apart of will take off, but what many overlooked was the money to be made off the Iphone 5. The Otter Box company slipped it’s way into the money using Apple’s same strategy. Give the consumers what they need before they even know it. Everyone who has had a smartphone in the past knows that they are much fragiler than past phone designs. Metal or Plastic with a glass screen cannot protect itself. The Otter Box company was able to take the corner of the market by not only coming out with a product earlier in the game but using two simple concepts that make their product affordable and stylish. A rubber outside negates and absorbs the impact of the fall, while plastic surrounds and absorbs the harder falls taking the pain away from the phone itself. However, the brilliance is not in the concept. The product has much improvement to be made. Speaking from personal experience, the rubber is too thin in areas and has quickly ripped off leaving the Iphone bare. The Otter Box does nothing to protect the camera area, which has indeed proven to be an issue for that my plastic is shattered like carbon fiber would. However, the ingenuity of the Otter box is it’s slick gender-neutral appearance. By matching the same colors Apple created, their product is compatible with anything Apple designs. The Lifebox is now a competing company, and it’s a race to see who can create the perfect protection system for the oh so dear Iphone 5.

Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtterBox

http://www.otterbox.com/apple-new-iphone-5-cases/apple-new-iphone-5-cases,default,sc.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.

An Ubiquitous Energy Supply?

 Two engineers from French automaker PSA Peugeot Citroen have been working in the opposite direction than the rest of the world. As everyone else joins the race in hybrid electric cars; they are looking to overcome the remarkable air/gas run car. Throughout Europe, these two engineers have gotten more satire and remarks than anyone else. Quickly, the critics were put to shame. Taking the concept of commercial plane hydraulics to compress gas and use it to move hydraulic fluid to a pump acting like a motor, these European explorers are making it happen. During normal drive, the system will switch between gas and air, using each energy source when applicable. Gas will be used on highways and steep hills, but in urban areas under 43 mph; air will be the energy source for 60 to 80 percent of the ride. While on gas, the system will constantly repressurize the nitrogen gas tank, and if it isn’t at the max, the regenerative-braking system will fill in the gaps. When Andres Yarce and Karim Mokaddem tested the prototype with Peugeot Citroen, the car worked better than predicted! The French company has decided to begin manufacturing the vehicles and the Hybrid Air powertrain will appear in all Citroen and Peugeot subcompact cars as an option to the consumers. The price is estimated to be equal to other gasoline hybrids.

Source:

Popular Science, “The Car That Runs on Air” March, 2014

Why Do We Use A Hard Taco??

tacoWhy was the hard taco ever created? It is the worst engineered design I’ve ever come across. The structure of a hard taco might be ideal if someone is on the run, but that only lasts for the first bite! After the first bite, you have a wreckage of broken tortilla shells, cold condiments, and hot meat left on the floor or in your hands. This messy concoction leaves the consumer unsatisfied and angry. It might look great on the TV when Taco Bell displays this image, but the result is a disaster. Another issue to point out is that, you will never get an even bite! As the shell is naturally tall, it will always take two bites to take off a piece of the shell. Taco Bell teaches its employees to put the spicy delicious meat on the bottom and condiments on top. No matter how you eat the taco, you will always get one bite being hot with meat and cold with condiments. It’s a wreck! There’s no way to get an even temperature bite. Tostito’s came out with the idea of Scoop chips. Once again, it’s a hard shell. It’s great to get a nice lightweight bite of salsa with these delicious salty chips. However, it can never handle the stress of guacamole, cheese, buffalo chicken dip, and other denser dips. If you were to look at the stress placed on the chip, it’s clear that the area with the ripples will be where the stress fracture occurs. I’m calling for a demand of innovation! Hard tacos need to be redesigned to be able to give an even tempered bite as well as when it breaks, for it to break without causing a wreckage on the floor or hands. Tostito’s Scoops need to look into a way for the scoops to have better strength. 

Sources:

http://www.michigandaily.com/content/hard-shell-tacos-versus-soft-shell-tacos-hardcore-taco-fans-prefer-hard-shell

http://lockergnome.net/questions/37829/hard-taco-or-soft-taco

http://www.sodahead.com/fun/whats-better-soft-or-hard-tacos/question-1687173/