Would you like speedcubing to become really popular?

[enigmahack]

Okay - I only wish to make 1 point and I don't think it's one that anyone has mentioned yet.

There are definitely noobs in here, and I would be willing to state that it's probably a 50/50 split of "good noobs" vs "Bad noobs"

The good noobs are the ones you don't hear from because they DO searches, they DO look things up, they DO study on their own and only post questions when they're really stuck. I would consider myself one of these noobs. (That being said, I'm not really a forum noob, I've been on forums while ARPANet was still used widely) but I'm not really a cubing noob either. I've been solving rubik's cubes since 1997 when I first got mine when I was 15 or so.

I'm a speedsolving noob... Anyway that's besides the point.

The point overall is that no matter where you go, there's going to be stupidity/noobishness/undesirable behavior.

On the flip side, haven't any of you gone onto another forum, interested in something new and poked around looking for something and didn't find it right away so you asked and got a response from the existing members there along the lines of "Look it up, Noob"?

There are 2 sides to every story and while groups tend to get larger, more and more people are going to be on the latter side. I think as a community we have to start being a little more open minded to the people, not the behavior.

We should be glad people are interested, not giving them hell because they don't know how to use a forum's search utility.

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

To be honest, with the recent influx of complete morons into the speedcubing community, I don't see how it would be for the best to have it as a big sport.

All those people who either think they know a lot about cubing and don't, or know a ton about cubing and aren't fast AT ALL. Or just morons in general I see your point, as there are many morons in the world

P.S. - add an option that say "I don't really care if speedcubing becomes popular or not." because the second option is still leaning towards speedcubing becoming popular...

P.P.S. - I also agree with the guy above me <(^-^)> Except for about the no-giving-them-hell part. I mean, if you aren't forceful with morons, when will they ever listen?

 

[fanwuq]

If it was more popular there would be more demand for cubes so cube prices would be lower and we could get our cubes in the us easier and faster. we might see some better speed cubes idk just some thoughts. I do also like the fact that not a lot of ppl can solve one you feel like you have accomplished something by solving it.

No, that would mean demand would go up for cubes, causing them to cost more, you have it backwards.

Wrong. See my post above and learn some economics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economies_of_scale

Wrong. See my previous post that was after your previous post. Popularity means a direct shift in demand curve. It does not change the supply. Economies of scale deals purely with the supply. You are talking about changes in long-run average cost in economies of scale and that is no where near a direct effect of changes in popularity.
You example does in fact exist, but your reasoning for why it happened was wrong. If it is a perfectly or monopolisticly competitive market, you will see short term profit when the demand increases. Entrance is easy, so more firms could enter the market to try to get of that profit. The firms expect profit, so they produce more, shifting the supply curve so that the price and quantity reaches equilibrium again. Quantity definitely increase. Price can go either way.

Causes of shift in demand
Changes in disposable income
Changes in taste and fashion (changes in preferences) AKA popularity
The availability and cost of credit
Changes in the prices of related goods (substitutes and complements)
Population size and composition
Expectations

Causes of shift in supply
number of sellers
price of other goods
input costs
technology
expectations firm expects profits from increase popularity of good.

The demand curve definitely shifts first, and the supply curve could follow. If you look at the graph (you can't argue against the almighty graph!), demand shifts outward and price shifts up. If for example a cubing competition is well publicized ahead of time, the firms may overproduce and prices would go down first. But the popularity itself shifts price up.
Way too many factors, and every situation is different. That's why I love economics! It really is similar to FMC cubing. It's all about the efficiency!




Slaughtermelon,

3. Don't care. Video games are lame, and that's that. I used to play a lot, but now I know they are unproductive.
4. I hear Americans in my school complain: "Why are we learning this calculus and stuff, it's not like we will ever use this in real life. I don't care about trig formulas if I want to be a ______." I don't know what kind of American are you. Most Americans I know are carefree and practical. They want to do something useful in real life and never study for tests. Asians, on the other hand, worry too much about pointless tests and the really nerdy ones aren't quite in touch with real life. It's not unheard of in China for students to commit suicide after failing important tests. The beauty is that the Americans who don't use quadratic and other equations properly in real life are normal. The opportunity cost of learning the formulas is too high and the real marginal return of learning them is low. They know how to prioritize what they do. I don't agree with your views, but I think you would agree with the view of Aldous Huxley in Brave New World .

 

[Bryan]

Not really. I was a *beginner* but I was never the kind of noob that you see nowadays, who ask tons of stupid questions, can't understand any tutorial unless it is on youtube, and don't know how to write English. When I started out I had the common sense to observe the forums (lurk) and read up on cubing before I started posting, instead of immediately making topics as soon as I could solve a cube. There is a huge difference between a newcomer and a noob; while someone who is just new may someday become a respected member of the community, a user who starts off looking like an idiot and stays that way never will be.

That's you. That's not every other "noob" who comes here. And just because they start out typing in 13375p34k (leetspeak, for those "not in the know"), doesn't mean you can't shape them to become what you want them to become (even if it means making a 10 part youtube video of cubetheory 101).

I was never a stupid newbie ever. I wish I could find the forum postings I made when I was younger (but it was on an educational BBS, not public), but I would have never dreamed about using bad grammar or spelling. And when I was first interested in Rubik's cube, I trolled the forums for a long long time.

The best noobs are ones you don't realize are noobs. Their name just slowly becomes familiar.

 

[Daniel Wu]

I'm a bad noob. Oh well.

 

[teller]

Wrong. See my previous post that was after your previous post. Popularity means a direct shift in demand curve. It does not change the supply. Economies of scale deals purely with the supply. You are talking about changes in long-run average cost in economies of scale and that is no where near a direct effect of changes in popularity.
You example does in fact exist, but your reasoning for why it happened was wrong. If it is a perfectly or monopolisticly competitive market, you will see short term profit when the demand increases. Entrance is easy, so more firms could enter the market to try to get of that profit. The firms expect profit, so they produce more, shifting the supply curve so that the price and quantity reaches equilibrium again. Quantity definitely increase. Price can go either way.

Causes of shift in demand
Changes in disposable income
Changes in taste and fashion (changes in preferences) AKA popularity
The availability and cost of credit
Changes in the prices of related goods (substitutes and complements)
Population size and composition
Expectations

Causes of shift in supply
number of sellers
price of other goods
input costs
technology
expectations firm expects profits from increase popularity of good.

The demand curve definitely shifts first, and the supply curve could follow. If you look at the graph (you can't argue against the almighty graph!), demand shifts outward and price shifts up. If for example a cubing competition is well publicized ahead of time, the firms may overproduce and prices would go down first. But the popularity itself shifts price up.
Way too many factors, and every situation is different. That's why I love economics! It really is similar to FMC cubing. It's all about the efficiency!

Agreed, economics is fascinating. Unfortunately, it's a complex system involving human choices that are difficult to capture with equations and graphs (although some are valid). At any rate, I can't see your graph because it didn't post.

You're correct that any sudden increase in demand will tend to cause prices to initially rise, but there is not really an "equilibrium" that it will return to--if demand persists, more suppliers will enter the game with new manufacturing innovations and new supply chains will form. There is a learning curve that suppliers walk down. For example, computers today cost $300 that easily out perform a $10,000 PC from 1990--and brother, demand has exploded astronomically since then. Maybe you wouldn't see prices fall if there were only a single supplier with some government mandated monopoly or patent, but that's not happening here.

Back in the 80's, cubing exploded and the alternate manufacturers came out of the woodwork. And cubes were cheaper. They didn't know about speedcubing back then so they were all pretty crappy quality, but you get the idea. Now we have manufacturing powerhouse China in the game so I think it's even more true today, and again...it's already happening since 2003 and cubes are cheaper and more abundant than ever.

If you're talking about mere fads, then perhaps I agree. They fade too quickly, before the economics can really kick in. But it feels to me like the renaissance of cubing is more than a fad.

 

[PhillipEspinoza]

Unbelievable what i'm reading here.

It makes me mad that people who started cubing within the last year are so intolerant towards a growing community. If we back when they started were as selfish, they wouldn't have been welcomed as friendly as they were.

I couldn't agree more. Just because you didn't perceive yourself as a noob when you began doesn't mean you weren't perceived as one. Sure some people might come off a little bit annoying/weird at first but that's not reason enough to ostracize them from the community. I think the speedcubing community should be more tolerant of noobs and newcomers alike because there is a lot more to be gained than lost from more publicity. I'd be willing to deal with thousands of "annoying" questions just for the sake of that one person who might be the next Nakaji or Erik sitting at home right now, ignorant of the cubing world.

It's like wanting to join a community, and when you're in, claiming that it shouldn't grow anymore.

This is just like anti-immigration conservatives in the USA. They are so quick to say that no more people should be allowed into the U.S. but they forget that their ancestors were once immigrants. It's the most frustrating thing. Oh, but they're Mexican immigrants, it's different right?

As long as the new people don't invade the cubing world, give everyone small pox blankets and ship 'em off to reservations, I'm cool with the community growing larger. Because trust me, reservations suck.

I think it's easy to lose sight of why we began cubing in the first place, but we gotta remember that those reasons are more significant than the slight annoyance we might receive upon reading a repetitive post on the speedsolving forum.

 

[fanwuq]

Agreed, economics is fascinating. Unfortunately, it's a complex system involving human choices that are difficult to capture with equations and graphs (although some are valid). At any rate, I can't see your graph because it didn't post. You're correct that any sudden increase in demand will tend to cause prices to initially rise, but there is not really an "equilibrium" that it will return to--if demand persists, more suppliers will enter the game with new manufacturing innovations and new supply chains will form. There is a learning curve that suppliers walk down. For example, computers today cost $300 that easily out perform a $10,000 PC from 1990--and brother, demand has exploded astronomically since then. Maybe you wouldn't see prices fall if there were only a single supplier with some government mandated monopoly or patent, but that's not happening here. Back in the 80's, cubing exploded and the alternate manufacturers came out of the woodwork. And cubes were cheaper. They didn't know about speedcubing back then so they were all pretty crappy quality, but you get the idea. Now we have manufacturing powerhouse China in the game so I think it's even more true today, and again...it's already happening since 2003 and cubes are cheaper and more abundant than ever. If you're talking about mere fads, then perhaps I agree. They fade too quickly, before the economics can really kick in. But it feels to me like the renaissance of cubing is more than a fad.

Oh sorry, I didn't post a graph this time. It's just the basic supply and demand graphs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand The graphs are very easy to use and actually are very accurate; you just have know how to draw all the right graphs. Failure to draw the correct graphs made people lose confidence in economists in the 70s when they weren't able to explain the stagflation.
In the case of the computers, it is not really the demand that caused the higher quality of computers and the lower prices even though people certainly demand such things. Technology is a shift factor for the supply curve.
I believe you saying that increased demand can cause increased supply; and increased supply can cause increased demand. See Induced demand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_profit
You can't really say something can be too fast for economics to kick in. Economics is always there. There are long and short term changes in supply and demand. A fad increase short term demand and increase prices. If the revenue exceeds production costs (including opportunity costs), the firm will make economic profits. This means more firms will enter the market. Eventually, the quantity produced = quantity demanded and it will reach an equilibrium quantity. Draw your own supply and demand graphs and try to make sense of it. Quantity necessarily increase, price depends on the situation and other factors. In the case of computers, supply did induce its own demand so quantity demanded of computers went way up. The technology changing very fast made making computers very fast--quantity went way up. Such an incredible boom in technology and the increased need of computer in everyday life drove the prices down. Computers nowadays are comparable to water. Water is very essential, but very cheap when you are in a nice city without water shortage. But when you only have a drop of water in the desert or very few computers back then; they are very valuable. It is the decreasing marginal returns you can get out of them.
In the 80s, cubes popular, there is profit to be made, and firms enter the market. Low input costs of low quality cubes + increase supply = lower costs and even more cubes that may induce demand. Also, the competition of so many firms with little market share lowers the prices. Very similar to the cubing situation of this decade except that we even have new technologies like V-cubes. Prices can continue to fall. Everything indirectly affect everything else. You just have to find the most direct causation and trace everything and make your inferences from there. I applaud you for thinking of induced demand.
Remember, economists have many hands, you don't know what goes on on the other hand. If you have a group of economists, they will most likely agree on the most basic facts, then all disagree on why what happened and what to do to fix the problems.

A lot of classes in school aren't very useful in real life. To anyone who hasn't taking AP Economics yet, it is a useful and fun class that doesn't involve a lot of work. I took both micro and macro and combined, they are like 1/3 the work of APUSH. Not much to memorize, just simple logic and understanding of the graphs.

Wow, we got off-topic. Anyway, see my previous on-topic posts. Basically, I agree with Phillip and Tobias.

 

[Daniel Wu]

This is just like anti-immigration conservatives in the USA. They are so quick to say that no more people should be allowed into the U.S. but they forget that their ancestors were once immigrants. It's the most frustrating thing. Oh, but they're Mexican immigrants, it's different right?

It's anti-ILLEGAL immigration. Immigration is fine.
/off topic

 

[royzabeast]

Yo guys, how do I edit the poll?

 

[Stefan]

Yo guys, how do I edit the poll?

I don't know whether you can, but you definitely shouldn't. You would invalidate all votes. Just learn from it and make better polls in the future.

 

[blade740]

I voted yes. If speedcubing got bigger, we'd have to change a lot of things. Competitions (major ones, at least) would be invitation only. We'll be there in a few years at this rate anyway. Even the "world championships" isn't fit for TV at the moment, because anyone who averages 45 seconds can go do their solves. A "world championship" should require its competitors to be world class. With a bigger sport we'd be harder-pressed to enforce that, and I think cubing would be much more interesting to watch (and much more rewarding to those who have the skill and dedication to make it to the top)

 

[TioMario]

Hell no!. It wouldn't be so special if everyone is practising it...

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

I wouldn't mind. I'm sorta bored with being the only speedsolver around town. Getting in competition would MURDER boredom.

 

[Edward]

I wouldn't mind. I'm sorta bored with being the only speedsolver around town. Getting in competition would MURDER boredom.

Took the words right out my mouth. But I still voted no because it would make the hobby a little less special. Like speedstacking.

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

Yeah. I mean, it's no so often I can go up to someone and say "What's your PB?". How often do YOU get to say that in SPEECH? TO a human being?

 

[Thomas09]

Hmm... Define "popular" to you. I would like a few more people in my community doing it, but not overdoing it. Like, I wouldn't want morons going "i can solv the rubix cube imma the best". I just want the select few intelligent people.

 

[JTW2007]

Of all the threads to bump, why this one?

 

[Gurplex2]

wtf does "making it less special" mean?
of course! it should be more popular!

im lucky, i live less than 10 minutes away from Justin Jaffray and Sarah Strong, and i love them. its nice meeting people who enjoy the same hobbies and i wish it happened more often.

and what the hell is with this special business!? if you want to be special then get cancer and run across canada like Terry Fox. he was pretty ****ing special!

 

[Forte]

I Brendon