Classical Art Paintings Updated with Social Media Notification

Nastya-Nudnik-5

In her ‘emoji nation’ series, Kiev-based artist Nastya Nudnik takes the event notifications from Facebook, Twitter and the lot that we are so familiar with on social media, and updates classical art paintings with these. That one tweak instantly transforms the timeless to something quite mundane.

[Source: nudnik]

World’s Top Brands: PwC ranked 4th for Brand Rating among the most valuable global brands in 2014

According to the 2013 BrandFinance Global 500, a list of the world’s top 500 most valuable brands, PwC ranks #4 by brand rating. Brand rating takes into account other financial metrics such as net margins, average revenue per customer, marketing and advertising spend, as well as qualitative measures such as brand affection and loyalty.

Best Global Brands   Brand Profiles   Valuations of the World’s Top Brands

This is the comparison with the other Big 4, listed under “Commercial Services”:

Best Global Brands   Brand Profiles - Commercial Services World’s Top Brands

Also, take a look at this benchmarking drill-down:

Brand Value / Enterprise Value* (as percentage)

Brand Value -Enterprise Value

Brand / enterprise value vs. brand rating

Brand - enterprise value vs. brand rating

Download the full comparison document: PwC_Big4_Brand_Comparison

[Source: Best Global Brands | BrandFinance]

The 10 Best and Worst Cities for Workers: San Jose rated #1

sanjose

Employees looking for a little more cheer in their lives should consider moving to the U.S. West Coast, new research shows.

California is home to three of the 10 happiest cities to work in, including San Jose, which tops the list. San Francisco and San Diego were also among the 10 cheeriest cities for employees, the study by online career community CareerBliss revealed.

The rankings were based on several key factors that affect work happiness, including an employee’s relationship with his or her boss and co-workers, work environment, job resources, compensation, growth opportunities, company culture, company reputation, daily tasks and job control over work performed on a daily basis. The data account for how an employee values each factor, as well as how important that factor is to the employee’s overall happiness.

In San Jose, the people and the company reputation had a large impact on overall happiness. As the capital of Silicon Valley, CareerBliss researchers said the northern California city has a large concentration of technology jobs that are often high paying and provide innovative work environments.

Other cities outside of California ranking in the top 10 included:

  • Washington, D.C.
  • Las Vegas, Nev.
  • Salt Lake City, Utah
  • Houston, Texas
  • Boston, Mass.
  • Philadelphia, Pa.
  • Charlotte, N.C.

Factors that ranked high across all of the happiest cities were the opportunities for growth and the relationship employees had with their co-workers.

In contrast, CareerBliss found that the rewards employees received and the support they got were lowest in cities that were the unhappiest. In addition, a common factor that affected unhappy cities was a lower ranking in overall work environment.

The 10 unhappiest cities were:

  1. Cincinnati, Ohio
  2. Orlando, Fla.
  3. Indianapolis, Ind.
  4. Denver, Colo.
  5. Pittsburgh, Pa.
  6. Tampa, Fla.
  7. Columbus, Ohio
  8. Sacramento, Calif.
  9. Miami, Fla.
  10. Arlington, Texas

“Having a clear picture of what drives happiness at work not only impacts companies, but entire communities and can help create happier environments all around,” said CareerBliss co-founder Heidi Golledge.

Happiest Cities for Work in 2014

Rank Cities Bliss Rating*
1 San Jose, CA 3.931
2 Washington D.C. 3.927
3 San Francisco, CA 3.925
4 Las Vegas, NV 3.891
5 Salt Lake City, UT 3.840
6 Houston, TX 3.817
7 Boston, MA 3.800
8 Philadelphia, PA 3.783
9 San Diego, CA 3.783
10 Charlotte, NC 3.782

Methodology

The CareerBliss data evaluates the key factors which affect work happiness, including: one’s relationship with their boss and co-workers, their work environment, job resources, compensation, growth opportunities, company culture, company reputation, their daily tasks, and job control over the work that they do on a daily basis. The data accounts for how an employee values each factor as well as how important that factor is to the employee’s overall happiness. Each review is given an average score indicating where the company places between one and five.

sanjose2

[Source: CareerBliss via Mashable]

Facebook Hilariously Debunks Princeton Study Saying It Will Lose 80% Of Users

epicfail1

Last week Princeton researchers released a widely covered study saying Facebook would lose 80% of its users by 2015-2017. But now Facebook’s data scientists have turned the study’s silly “correlation equals causation” methodology of tracking Google search volume against it to show Princeton would lose all of its students by 2021.

A Facebook spokesperson says “the report that Princeton put out is utter nonsense.” Indeed, it’s flawed throughout.

First, it makes a strained epidemiological analogy comparing Facebook to a “disease” that users eventually “recover” from. Facebook may be a massive drain on our attention that some people get sick of, but that doesn’t mean it actually operates like a virus. The researchers then use Myspace as an example of how users recover from a social network and abandon it as if it happened naturally. They make no mention of how Myspace was in fact killed by Facebook.

But the critical error in the non-peer-reviewed study is stating that since the volume of searches for “Facebook” began declining in 2012, it must mean there’s an ongoing decline in Facebook usage.

Yeah, no. Back in Facebook’s web heyday around 2007, many people did surf to the social network by searching for “Facebook” or “Facebook login.” But then this thing called mobile came along and people started getting to Facebook by opening an app, not searching for a website. So searches for “Facebook” declining doesn’t prove much considering over half of Facebook’s traffic now comes from mobile. Since 2012 Facebook has kept growing to its current 1.19 billion users, and it has never had an overall decline in user count.

This isn’t to say Facebook doesn’t have some big, big problems on the horizon. It’s certainlynot “cool” anymore, whether or not it cares. It’s admitted a slight drop in usage amongst young teens in the U.S. It’s seeing increasing competition from mobile-first social apps likeSnapchat and WhatsApp. It will eventually need to weather the medium shift to wearables. Many of its early superstars have left. Hackers are shaking faith in sharing private information. And mobile phones, where you own your social graph in the form of your friends’ phone numbers, make it easier for people to switch to another social network.

Any combination of these could prevent Facebook from growing and cause it to eventually shrink. It’s quite likely that smartphone-carrying Westerners may divide their attention among more apps not owned by Facebook over the next few years. But completely losing 952 million monthly users by 2017 would require cataclysmic disaster.

And even if that happens, it’s as likely to be because fewer people search for “Facebook” or that it resembles a “disease” as the Earth running out of air by 2060 — which is exactly what Facebook’s tongue-in-cheek data scientists prove will happen using Princeton’s methodology. As one of our readers tweeted, “maybe Princeton should worry less about who’s googling Facebook and more about who’s googling Coursera

Read the full Note below (published with permission) from Facebook’s Mike Develin, Lada Adamic, and Sean Taylor. It’s chock full of lols.

Like many of you, we were intrigued by a recent article by Princeton researchers predicting the imminent demise of Facebook. Of particular interest was the innovative use of Google search data to predict engagement trends, instead of studying the actual engagement trends. Using the same robust methodology featured in the paper, we attempted to find out more about this “Princeton University” – and you won’t believe what we found!

In keeping with the scientific principle “correlation equals causation,” our research unequivocally demonstrated that Princeton may be in danger of disappearing entirely. Looking at page likes on Facebook, we find the following alarming trend:

Now, Facebook isn’t the only repository of human knowledge out there. A search of Google Scholar revealing a plethora of scholarly articles of great scholarliness turned up the following results, showing the percentage of articles matching the query “Princeton” by year:

The trend is similarly alarming: since 2009, the percentage of “Princeton” papers in journals has dropped dramatically.

Of course, Princeton University is primarily an institution of higher learning – so as long as it has students, it’ll be fine. Unfortunately, in investigating this, we found a strong correlation between the undergraduate enrollment of an institution and its Google Trends index:

Sadly, this spells bad news for this Princeton entity, whose Google Trends search scores have been declining for the last several years:

This trend suggests that Princeton will have only half its current enrollment by 2018, and by 2021 it will have no students at all, agreeing with the previous graph of scholarly scholarliness. Based on our robust scientific analysis, future generations will only be able to imagine this now-rubble institution that once walked this earth.

While we are concerned for Princeton University, we are even more concerned about the fate of the planet — Google Trends for “air” have also been declining steadily, and our projections show that by the year 2060 there will be no air left:

 

As previous researchers [J. Sparks, 2008] have expressed in the past, this will have grievous consequences for the fate of all humanity, not just our academic colleagues in New Jersey.

P.S. We don’t really think Princeton or the world’s air supply is going anywhere soon. We love Princeton (and air). As data scientists, we wanted to give a fun reminder that not all research is created equal – and some methods of analysis lead to pretty crazy conclusions.

[Source: TechCrunch]