![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.conversiondiary.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/09\/7_quick_takes_sm1.jpg\" "\\"7_quick_takes_sm\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>\u2014 1 \u2014<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n This week\u2019s theme, beautiful, beautifully made things. \u00a0And we\u2019re starting with a sports article.<\/p>\n Grantland\u2019s Zach Lowe walks us through the problems with the current NBA draft system<\/a> (it incentivizes teams to tank seasons to snag a draft pick) and explains an alternate proposal.<\/p>\n Grantland obtained a copy of the proposal, which would eliminate the draft lottery and replace it with a system in which each of the 30 teams would pick in a specific first-round draft slot once \u2014 and exactly once \u2014 every 30 years. Each team would simply cycle through the 30 draft slots, year by year, in a predetermined order designed so that teams pick in different areas of the draft each year. Teams would know with 100 percent certainty in which draft slots they would pick every year, up to 30 years out from the start of every 30-year cycle. The practice of protecting picks would disappear; there would never be a Harrison Barnes\u2013Golden State situation again, and it wouldn\u2019t require a law degree to track ownership of every traded pick leaguewide\u2026<\/p>\n The wheel, which has all sorts of complex algorithms behind it, is designed in such a way that each half-decade mini-cycle has at least two top-12 picks clustered next to each other \u2014 a means of encouraging long-term building around young players, and of allowing bad teams to get better quickly if they draft well.<\/p>\n Each six-year set of picks is roughly equivalent to all other six-year cycles, so no team is ever stuck in an unfavorable cycle of bad picks.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The article has some very helpful diagrams and history, and I recommend clicking through.<\/p>\n <\/a>\u2014 2 \u2014<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n And speaking of intricate algorithms, a friend of mine recently lent me her copy of\u00a0The\u00a0Shakespearean\u00a0Ciphers Examined<\/em><\/a>. \u00a0Two crytography buffs (using time freed up after beating the Nazis) took aim at theories that Shakespeare\u2019s plays contain secret messages about their authorship. \u00a0The math explanations are clear, and the commentary is snarky, as you can see below:<\/p>\n To an ordinary person the resultant message would be enough to prove there is no cipher being used. The difference between the ordinary person and the Baconian is, shall we say, one of degrees of persistence and ingenuity\u2026<\/p>\n Other variations of differing degrees of ingenuity by other writers have appeared from time to time. Some anagrams are in English; for example. one version (Baconiana<\/em>, April 1902) runs: \u2018But thus I told Franciiiiii Bacon\u2019. The last word but one, it is explained, is Fran followed by iiiiii, or 6 in Roman numerals: adopting the French pronunciation, Fran-6 yields Francis, and voil\u00e0!<\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/a>\u2014 3 \u2014<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Similarly intricate, but a little more self-aware is the annual Rube Goldberg Machine Contest. Contestants are trying to hit a nail with a hammer, but my favorite machine was the very first one shown in the video below (made by one of the judges).<\/p>\n