I just took the Kingdomality Test. Over the past ten years or so I've taken the Kingdomality Test either three or four times (including today's test). I am a shepherd; here's what they have to say about me:
"Your distinct personality, The Shepherd is to tend to your human flock. You understand the needs of those for whom you are responsible. Shepherds are vigilant and reliable. You realize your obligation and commitment to the well being of those entrusted to your care. Shepherds are very dependable. You engender a feeling of comfort and stability to those within your charge. On the positive side, Shepherds can be empathic, caring, understanding, practical and realistic. On the negative side, you may be manipulative, close-minded and sentimentally rigid. Interestingly, your preference is just as applicable in today's corporate kingdoms."
What's your medieval vocational personality?
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Friday, November 12, 2010
We Are Being Raped Every Day
I was chatting with a buddy today, and he gave me an analogy that I think is worthwhile: we are being raped every day of our lives by advertisers.
From Wikipedia: "In criminal law, rape is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with another person without that person's consent." I'll submit to you now that it is true we are not all being forced into physical, sexual intercourse. But consider this: every day (if not every hour or even more frequently) we are unavoidably subject to advertising that is meant to stimulate us into purchasing a product or service, and to effect that goal advertisments must be noticed and sufficiently pleasurable so as to cause us to pay attention and be stirred to fill a perceived need by the product or service being offered. With the exception of copulation, this sounds suspiciously like the legal definition of rape according to Wikipedia.
Advertisements are everywhere you go: all over the internet, on the TV, on the radio, on signs and billboards, in the movies, in books, on DVDs, in your software, in your magazines, in your newspapers, on your doorstep, in your e-mail, in your postal service mailbox, and even in the bathroom stalls. You can hardly do anything or go anywhere without being subject to an advertisement of some form in some way. It's invasive and it's forced since in many instances you cannot avoid them.
Advertisements are meant to cause pleasure. In some form or fashion your brain is rewarded by an advertisement that catches your interest. If your reward pathways and pleasure centers weren't stimulated by an advertisement then you'd find little to no interest in what was being offered. If you really want to get scared, find some information about "neuromarketing" and ask yourself what kind of potential this has to effect our society. Also consider the promised pleasure of receiving whatever it is that you're buying. Receiving something new or even novel stimulates the pleasure centers in the brain as well.
Studies have shown that spending money causes stimulation in the pain centers of the brain! When you pay money your brain is stimulated as if you were being physically hurt. You are being compelled to hurt yourself through the reward of pleasure. Humans, with a natural drive to seek and experience pleasure, have historically done as was natural and pleasured themselves with buying products and services. Humans have ignored the economic ramifications (pain!) of unplanned spending and the level of debt for most people is a reflection of this. I speculate this is because of the pleasure offered as the reward and the lack of forward thinking of the pain. I also speculate that if a person saw the personal, financial ramifications of their spending along side the pleasure-inducing advertisement for what they want to buy then many purchases would not get made.
In the end I conclude that advertisers are assaulting consumers with the imminent threat of pain (biochemical and possibly economic) by enticing consumers with forced pleasure through the exposure of advertisements that cannot be avoided into spending money on their products. We are being raped every day by advertisements, and most of the time we don't even realize it.
I feel like I need to take a shower.
From Wikipedia: "In criminal law, rape is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with another person without that person's consent." I'll submit to you now that it is true we are not all being forced into physical, sexual intercourse. But consider this: every day (if not every hour or even more frequently) we are unavoidably subject to advertising that is meant to stimulate us into purchasing a product or service, and to effect that goal advertisments must be noticed and sufficiently pleasurable so as to cause us to pay attention and be stirred to fill a perceived need by the product or service being offered. With the exception of copulation, this sounds suspiciously like the legal definition of rape according to Wikipedia.
Advertisements are everywhere you go: all over the internet, on the TV, on the radio, on signs and billboards, in the movies, in books, on DVDs, in your software, in your magazines, in your newspapers, on your doorstep, in your e-mail, in your postal service mailbox, and even in the bathroom stalls. You can hardly do anything or go anywhere without being subject to an advertisement of some form in some way. It's invasive and it's forced since in many instances you cannot avoid them.
Advertisements are meant to cause pleasure. In some form or fashion your brain is rewarded by an advertisement that catches your interest. If your reward pathways and pleasure centers weren't stimulated by an advertisement then you'd find little to no interest in what was being offered. If you really want to get scared, find some information about "neuromarketing" and ask yourself what kind of potential this has to effect our society. Also consider the promised pleasure of receiving whatever it is that you're buying. Receiving something new or even novel stimulates the pleasure centers in the brain as well.
Studies have shown that spending money causes stimulation in the pain centers of the brain! When you pay money your brain is stimulated as if you were being physically hurt. You are being compelled to hurt yourself through the reward of pleasure. Humans, with a natural drive to seek and experience pleasure, have historically done as was natural and pleasured themselves with buying products and services. Humans have ignored the economic ramifications (pain!) of unplanned spending and the level of debt for most people is a reflection of this. I speculate this is because of the pleasure offered as the reward and the lack of forward thinking of the pain. I also speculate that if a person saw the personal, financial ramifications of their spending along side the pleasure-inducing advertisement for what they want to buy then many purchases would not get made.
In the end I conclude that advertisers are assaulting consumers with the imminent threat of pain (biochemical and possibly economic) by enticing consumers with forced pleasure through the exposure of advertisements that cannot be avoided into spending money on their products. We are being raped every day by advertisements, and most of the time we don't even realize it.
I feel like I need to take a shower.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Why Terry Goodkind Is the Best Author for All Eternity
- Bilbo and Frodo Baggins had "adventures;" Richard and Kahlan led epic lives.
- The Seeker does not need a compass to guide him.
- Tava bread tastes better than lembas bread.
- Zeddicus Zul Zorander puts Gandalf to shame.
- Gratch could shred Aslan apart before so much as a growl escaped the lion's throat.
- Riding a feisty, independent, red dragon that threatens to eat you all the time is far more thrilling than riding a luck dragon.
- Polgara would never win a beauty contest; Shota would never lose one.
- Harry Potter needs a wand to cast spells; Richard needs only his instinct and anger.
- Who needs Yoda when you have the Wizard's Rules? (Yoda's advice is far less practical.)
- Voldemort is just a wizard gone bad; Emperor Jagang and the Imperial Order is truly evil incarnate.
- Oompa Loompas? Really?
- The Yellow Brick Road is a boring and predetermined path. The Sword of Truth series demonstrates a value of free will and choosing your own path--a far more exciting life to live.
- Sisters of the Dark could incinerate a wicked witch of any cardinal direction before the witch knew what was happening.
- The Force is not immune to being captured by a Mord-Sith.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
But It's An Error Page!
In truth, I cannot deny that Flash has a place on the internet as a web technology. Lots of cool and useful things can be done with Flash. What bothers me most is (1) it's often abused (think ads), and (2) it's everywhere, even where it doesn't need to be. Take this screen cap that I saved a few minutes ago.
It's an error page. The web server is telling me that something is wrong. WHY THE <expletive> DOES IT NEED FLASH?!? Granted, I didn't thoroughly scour the web page's source to see if it's trying to serve an ad, but regardless of the content trying to be served via Flash it doesn't belong on an error page. In fact, ads don't belong on an error page, either. It's an error page for crying out loud! Don't complicate it!
While I'm griping, I might as well gripe about myself, too. It seems far too often these days I'm finding something about which to gripe. There are so many things that I could let get on my nerves, and I've unfortunately fallen victim to focusing on those things instead of more encouraging or enlightening things. It's my own fault and I take full responsibility for this. What do you do to combat negative thinking and remind yourself about the good things in life?
Monday, April 19, 2010
YouTube Gripes
What's one of the most annoying things about television? Advertising. Radio? Advertising. Hulu.com? Advertising. And now YouTube? That's right... Advertising. It's everywhere, and it makes me want to /wrists.
SOME advertising on the Internet (although very little) is actually done tastefully. In fact, I'm not sure I have a problem with unintrusive advertising. Take GMail, for example, or the Google search engine. Small text ads that don't interfere with the content I'm trying to view. Admittedly, I think they have little effect on me, as I mostly ignore them and hardly ever remember seeing them. But they're there, so the advertisers are happy and the websites posting them are happy.
But YouTube has for some time put ads at the bottom of videos. DIE YOUTUBE!! It's really dumb, because they cover the bottom portion of the video, and to get rid of it I have to click something. I hate it enough to consider not using YouTube, but so far it hasn't gotten to that point (yet). I'm wondering when we'll get to the point where the bandwidth consumed by ads exceeds the bandwidth consumed by spam e-mail. I know we have a long way to go for that, but it wouldn't surprise me if spam actually had a rival in the future...
SOME advertising on the Internet (although very little) is actually done tastefully. In fact, I'm not sure I have a problem with unintrusive advertising. Take GMail, for example, or the Google search engine. Small text ads that don't interfere with the content I'm trying to view. Admittedly, I think they have little effect on me, as I mostly ignore them and hardly ever remember seeing them. But they're there, so the advertisers are happy and the websites posting them are happy.
But YouTube has for some time put ads at the bottom of videos. DIE YOUTUBE!! It's really dumb, because they cover the bottom portion of the video, and to get rid of it I have to click something. I hate it enough to consider not using YouTube, but so far it hasn't gotten to that point (yet). I'm wondering when we'll get to the point where the bandwidth consumed by ads exceeds the bandwidth consumed by spam e-mail. I know we have a long way to go for that, but it wouldn't surprise me if spam actually had a rival in the future...
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Comcast vs Net Neutrality
So apparently Comcast won a court case whereby it was determined that Comcast has the right to restrict internet traffic that traverses their network. There are at least several viewpoints on this, but I'm focusing on two in particular: (1) Comcast is offering the service, owns the equipment providing the service, and has every right to set forth the terms of use for that service. If customers don't like the terms of that service then they can get internet service from another company (if available) or do without. (2) Comcast restricting traffic that traverses their network is censorship. Everyone except the Chinese government knows that censorship is evil.
I can honestly say that I see and understand both viewpoints. Comcast wants to protect their investment and offer adequate levels of service to all their customers. In particular, BitTorrent traffic apparently places an undue stress on their network and hampers the adequacy of service to other customers on their network. The move to block BitTorrent traffic is a protective mechanism. But customers want free reign over what they can do on the public internet. The internet is public and (supposedly) largely unregulated. Paying for access to this public medium entitles people to use it as they wish within the laws of the land set forth by the government. This free reign is unrestrictive and the most desireable scenario. (Like I said, censorship is evil.)
It's a battle between what customers want and what service providers offer. Customers aren't going to do without the service, and if providers are few there isn't much choice for the customer. I see two possible conclusions that I can draw about Comcast. First, Comcast is being a dick to its customer base. It either has a god complex or some underlying motive to extort money from customers through all of this. But I'm usually the type of person to give the benefit of the doubt in most scenarios, and I will do so here. I defer to my second possible conclusion, and that is that Comcast has an inadequate infrastructure to handle the traffic generated by their customers. They've provided more offerings than they can support, and are now restricting their offerings so they can provide service to their too-large customer base.
According to Comcast's SEC filing on February 23, 2010, Comcast had a net income of $3.638 billion in 2009, an increase of 42.8% from 2008. Now with a debt of $29.1 billion I can understand that Comcast might want to spend money paying that off. In fact, they apparently reduced their debt by $3.4 billion in 2009 according to the filing. At the same time I'd like to think an investment of even part of that $3.638 billion net income in infrastructure upgrades would allow for happier, unrestricted customers more willing to give their money to Comcast for internet service. But that's just me.
What do you think?
I can honestly say that I see and understand both viewpoints. Comcast wants to protect their investment and offer adequate levels of service to all their customers. In particular, BitTorrent traffic apparently places an undue stress on their network and hampers the adequacy of service to other customers on their network. The move to block BitTorrent traffic is a protective mechanism. But customers want free reign over what they can do on the public internet. The internet is public and (supposedly) largely unregulated. Paying for access to this public medium entitles people to use it as they wish within the laws of the land set forth by the government. This free reign is unrestrictive and the most desireable scenario. (Like I said, censorship is evil.)
It's a battle between what customers want and what service providers offer. Customers aren't going to do without the service, and if providers are few there isn't much choice for the customer. I see two possible conclusions that I can draw about Comcast. First, Comcast is being a dick to its customer base. It either has a god complex or some underlying motive to extort money from customers through all of this. But I'm usually the type of person to give the benefit of the doubt in most scenarios, and I will do so here. I defer to my second possible conclusion, and that is that Comcast has an inadequate infrastructure to handle the traffic generated by their customers. They've provided more offerings than they can support, and are now restricting their offerings so they can provide service to their too-large customer base.
According to Comcast's SEC filing on February 23, 2010, Comcast had a net income of $3.638 billion in 2009, an increase of 42.8% from 2008. Now with a debt of $29.1 billion I can understand that Comcast might want to spend money paying that off. In fact, they apparently reduced their debt by $3.4 billion in 2009 according to the filing. At the same time I'd like to think an investment of even part of that $3.638 billion net income in infrastructure upgrades would allow for happier, unrestricted customers more willing to give their money to Comcast for internet service. But that's just me.
What do you think?
Friday, March 19, 2010
Search Engines: Evil Business Practices
I saw an article on MSN's web page that interested me, so I started reading it. It's four pages long, but all of the juicy details were links. (i.e. "How does she make that much money? Doing this, she's said." "Doing this" is a link.)
And to what does it link? Bing. It's a link to a Bing search. It appears as though Microsoft is submitting searches to their own search engine with the exact details of what you wanted to know. To get the details of the article one must only look at the URL of the link without clicking it. But what's the point?
I can only imagine it's a numbers and popularity game. If Bing jumped into the number one spot of search engines, it's because everyone who reads MSN articles are reading fluff and clicking links to get the real details. This increases Bing's usage counts artificially which allows Microsoft to claim they're rising in popularity.
If you ask me it's a cheap way to fudge your numbers and shows a lack of integrity when it comes to your business practices. If your search technology doesn't stand up to the competition, let it die. Do well what you CAN do, and leave the rest to someone who can do the other stuff better.
And to what does it link? Bing. It's a link to a Bing search. It appears as though Microsoft is submitting searches to their own search engine with the exact details of what you wanted to know. To get the details of the article one must only look at the URL of the link without clicking it. But what's the point?
I can only imagine it's a numbers and popularity game. If Bing jumped into the number one spot of search engines, it's because everyone who reads MSN articles are reading fluff and clicking links to get the real details. This increases Bing's usage counts artificially which allows Microsoft to claim they're rising in popularity.
If you ask me it's a cheap way to fudge your numbers and shows a lack of integrity when it comes to your business practices. If your search technology doesn't stand up to the competition, let it die. Do well what you CAN do, and leave the rest to someone who can do the other stuff better.
Monday, March 8, 2010
What Would You Do with 48 Cores Contest
AMD has asked, "what would you do with 48 cores?"
http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/03/03/48-cores-contest/
This is my entry submission. Yes, it is a real submission. Yes, I would be surprised if I won (and probably the recipient of an excessive amount of hate mail).
My entry...
In short I would underutilize them.
Let's be honest: relatively few people or organizations can or would actually use eight or 16 cores to a somewhat full potential, much less 48 of them. Even if I had an idea that might change the world, neither I nor my organization have the capital to realize the technology necessary to use the cores to accomplish my idea. I'd need more than just the computer. Verily, I'd probably just virtualize what I have and do my part to save energy and costs as best as I can. The best way to change the world is to start in my own back yard.
I would certainly show off my new toy and boast to everyone who will hear from where it came and how I got it, though...
http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/03/03/48-cores-contest/
This is my entry submission. Yes, it is a real submission. Yes, I would be surprised if I won (and probably the recipient of an excessive amount of hate mail).
My entry...
In short I would underutilize them.
Let's be honest: relatively few people or organizations can or would actually use eight or 16 cores to a somewhat full potential, much less 48 of them. Even if I had an idea that might change the world, neither I nor my organization have the capital to realize the technology necessary to use the cores to accomplish my idea. I'd need more than just the computer. Verily, I'd probably just virtualize what I have and do my part to save energy and costs as best as I can. The best way to change the world is to start in my own back yard.
I would certainly show off my new toy and boast to everyone who will hear from where it came and how I got it, though...
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Credit Card Payments
I've always wondered about something. Let's say I open a credit card account with Big Bank of the United States. Then I go and open up a credit card account with Little Bank of Virginia. As it is with my real credit card, if I pay any new balance on the first statement since a charge or cash advance is made I won't get any finance charges.
So I buy a computer or a bunch of clothes or something and charge it to Big Bank's card. Now I have a $1,276 balance. When the first statement comes in I go to Little Bank and get a $1,276 cash advance, deposit it into my checking account, and pay Big Bank. I get no finance charge on my Big Bank card, because I paid the balance within the first billing cycle that the charge was made. I have a $1,276 balance on my Little Bank credit card.
Next month I get my Little Bank credit card statement. I go to Big Bank, get a $1,276 cash advance, deposit it into my checking account, and use it to pay my Little Bank credit card balance. Since it was paid on the first billing cycle after making the charge to that card (in this case a cash advance), there is no finance charge. I now have a $1,276 balance on my Big Bank credit card.
The third month (and every odd month thereafter) I get my cash advance from Little Bank and pay Big Bank, and the fourth month (and every even month thereafter) I get my cash advance from Big Bank and pay Little Bank. Paying each new cash advance every month yields me no finance charges, because each payment is being made every billing cycle, the first billing cycle after each new charge. In effect, I can carry the balance indefinitely as long as I'm diligent enough to keep up with it every month. The "finance charges" I pay would be time and fuel to maintain this routine, and I could conceivably pay off the balance as quickly or slowly as I wish.
Would this work, and what protects financial institutions from someone doing this very type of thing?
So I buy a computer or a bunch of clothes or something and charge it to Big Bank's card. Now I have a $1,276 balance. When the first statement comes in I go to Little Bank and get a $1,276 cash advance, deposit it into my checking account, and pay Big Bank. I get no finance charge on my Big Bank card, because I paid the balance within the first billing cycle that the charge was made. I have a $1,276 balance on my Little Bank credit card.
Next month I get my Little Bank credit card statement. I go to Big Bank, get a $1,276 cash advance, deposit it into my checking account, and use it to pay my Little Bank credit card balance. Since it was paid on the first billing cycle after making the charge to that card (in this case a cash advance), there is no finance charge. I now have a $1,276 balance on my Big Bank credit card.
The third month (and every odd month thereafter) I get my cash advance from Little Bank and pay Big Bank, and the fourth month (and every even month thereafter) I get my cash advance from Big Bank and pay Little Bank. Paying each new cash advance every month yields me no finance charges, because each payment is being made every billing cycle, the first billing cycle after each new charge. In effect, I can carry the balance indefinitely as long as I'm diligent enough to keep up with it every month. The "finance charges" I pay would be time and fuel to maintain this routine, and I could conceivably pay off the balance as quickly or slowly as I wish.
Would this work, and what protects financial institutions from someone doing this very type of thing?
Monday, February 22, 2010
The Fight Against the Sale of Used Games
This is almost infuriating. Slashdot (among others) are reporting (http://tinyurl.com/y8vt3mn) that Sony has now joined EA in extorting money from its player base by forcing registration of games for online play.... and when the game is resold or transferred, the recipient of the used game must fork over more money for another registration code to allow online game play.
Now, I readily admit that I could be ignorant about this, but it seems to me that the gaming companies are doing a disservice to their customers with this. I understand the desire to make money, but there comes a point when it's just uncouth if not outright tacky. Is there a panel somewhere that gets hired by companies for the sole purpose of finding ways to screw over customers or extort money?
When it all comes down to it, the world is brimming with greedy money-mongers who don't care about anything except money and/or themselves. I remember when concepts like community and sharing were more prevalent in areas where they're now lacking. Sometimes I'm almost ashamed to be a part of this earth, a part of human society.
Now, I readily admit that I could be ignorant about this, but it seems to me that the gaming companies are doing a disservice to their customers with this. I understand the desire to make money, but there comes a point when it's just uncouth if not outright tacky. Is there a panel somewhere that gets hired by companies for the sole purpose of finding ways to screw over customers or extort money?
When it all comes down to it, the world is brimming with greedy money-mongers who don't care about anything except money and/or themselves. I remember when concepts like community and sharing were more prevalent in areas where they're now lacking. Sometimes I'm almost ashamed to be a part of this earth, a part of human society.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Valentine's Day Post Mortem
I actually was thinking about this yesterday, but decided that I wanted to wait to post. Today's good, though.
Why is Valentine's Day wrought with pink and red? When I see so much pink and red I feel my face getting hot as if the stove burner was left on and I was hovering near it. When I think of pink and red I think of heat, fire, blood, and death. I think of people burning alive as flesh gets cooked and charred. Is this really how a person wants to think of Valentine's Day?
Yeah, I didn't think so.
It's supposed to remind you of love.
Okay. But it doesn't. What connection does pink/red have with love? I'll tell you... it has none. Someone started it, and someone else kept it going. Just like love and hearts. There's no connection between love and a heart. The physical and biological evidences from the emotion labeled "love" manifests itself many times as a sensation in the chest, where the heart is. I hear it told that long ago (probably with the ancient Greeks and important thinkers of human history) that this was taken as evidence that love originates from a person's heart (since modern medical discoveries of endorphins and brain functions haven't been made yet). It was a misguided and mistaken association perpetuated through ignorance. For all I know the pink/red association with love and Valentine's Day was arbitrary.
Girls like pink, and it's about wooing the girls and being romantic.
Posh. Girls should be wooed as a normal part of the dating process (although that's not to say it stops there) and romance should exist throughout the life of a love relationship. I don't need an excuse to enjoy romance, just a girlfriend/wife. I even hear it said that the unexpected acts of love can be more meaningful... like a random breakfast in bed or something. Besides, not all girls like pink and/or red. What am I supposed to do? Pick out all of the pink and red candies from the box and give those girls the rest? I'm not about to give my girl a used dessert or candy for Valentine's Day.
Then what do YOU want to do about it?
Nothing. I just don't like being inundated with so much pink and red.
Then why did you bring it up?
Because it's blog content. Duh. There's no point to it. I'm just expressing my dislike for so much pink and red. I'm throwing out the question of how pink and red got associated with Valentine's Day. I'm not trying to change the world here or anything. I don't want to DO anything about it except learn how pink and red got so prevalent when it comes to Valentine's Day.
As a parting thought, I don't claim to be absolved from my own ignornace of anything.
Why is Valentine's Day wrought with pink and red? When I see so much pink and red I feel my face getting hot as if the stove burner was left on and I was hovering near it. When I think of pink and red I think of heat, fire, blood, and death. I think of people burning alive as flesh gets cooked and charred. Is this really how a person wants to think of Valentine's Day?
Yeah, I didn't think so.
It's supposed to remind you of love.
Okay. But it doesn't. What connection does pink/red have with love? I'll tell you... it has none. Someone started it, and someone else kept it going. Just like love and hearts. There's no connection between love and a heart. The physical and biological evidences from the emotion labeled "love" manifests itself many times as a sensation in the chest, where the heart is. I hear it told that long ago (probably with the ancient Greeks and important thinkers of human history) that this was taken as evidence that love originates from a person's heart (since modern medical discoveries of endorphins and brain functions haven't been made yet). It was a misguided and mistaken association perpetuated through ignorance. For all I know the pink/red association with love and Valentine's Day was arbitrary.
Girls like pink, and it's about wooing the girls and being romantic.
Posh. Girls should be wooed as a normal part of the dating process (although that's not to say it stops there) and romance should exist throughout the life of a love relationship. I don't need an excuse to enjoy romance, just a girlfriend/wife. I even hear it said that the unexpected acts of love can be more meaningful... like a random breakfast in bed or something. Besides, not all girls like pink and/or red. What am I supposed to do? Pick out all of the pink and red candies from the box and give those girls the rest? I'm not about to give my girl a used dessert or candy for Valentine's Day.
Then what do YOU want to do about it?
Nothing. I just don't like being inundated with so much pink and red.
Then why did you bring it up?
Because it's blog content. Duh. There's no point to it. I'm just expressing my dislike for so much pink and red. I'm throwing out the question of how pink and red got associated with Valentine's Day. I'm not trying to change the world here or anything. I don't want to DO anything about it except learn how pink and red got so prevalent when it comes to Valentine's Day.
As a parting thought, I don't claim to be absolved from my own ignornace of anything.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Hope in a Decidedly Futile Effort
What's this? Is there another blog post here? Say it ain't so!
Okay, so what's this all about, anyway? In truth, this is a test. Someone (who I won't name, but their initials are Troy Goldie) has found my blog. Or so they claim. Is this unnamed person watching for an update? Will this unnamed person find this post and contact me about it? Hrmmm.... I hope so. CALL ME!!! (Just don't call me bad names.)
I'm not an optimist at heart. I try to hope for the best, but in my heart I know that things will turn out wrong. I'm involved, afterall; therefore, it stands to reason that something will go wrong along the way. I also don't have anything to say to the world. At least, not to the world at large. Certain pieces of the population I'd be happy to tell them to DIAF, but overall I'd rather stay under my varying-sized rock and play WoW. So in a dichotomy that is called my life, I have hope that I will post more on this blog after having already decided that I won't have the motivation to keep posting (resulting in it becoming stagnant for another ... however long it was since my last post). Self fulfilling prophecy? Let me tell you something about prophecy.
A prophet is simply one who speaks for another. To receive a prophecy is to receive a message on behalf of another (typically a divine being) so that it can be communicated on the message-sender's behalf. If I were to declare something to be (according to my beliefs that are of my own design) and then act in a way to carry it out, there is no prophecy involved. The "prophecy" is a declarative statement based on what I think is correct. By that logic a "self fulfilling prophecy" does not exist. I am the one creating the message, I am the one declaring the message to others, and then I am the one acting in a way that makes it so.
Huh?
Let me put it this way: I hope to keep updating this blog. I have reason to believe that this blog will NOT be updated as I hope. Past experience with yourspace and this blog have proven that I did not have the motivation to keep updating these things, and nothing has given me reason to believe that things are different now. The logical conclusion is that my hope of updating this blog regularly is misplaced, and any attempt to fulfill that hope is futile. NONE of this paragraph has anything to do with prophecy.
I like to do what I call "express myself." I think you may call it "rambling." Either way, it's what I do. I'm not a concise person; that's no secret and I'll readily admit that. But as long as what I say is interesting enough to not solicit tl;dr comments, then I don't really care.
Okay, so what's this all about, anyway? In truth, this is a test. Someone (who I won't name, but their initials are Troy Goldie) has found my blog. Or so they claim. Is this unnamed person watching for an update? Will this unnamed person find this post and contact me about it? Hrmmm.... I hope so. CALL ME!!! (Just don't call me bad names.)
I'm not an optimist at heart. I try to hope for the best, but in my heart I know that things will turn out wrong. I'm involved, afterall; therefore, it stands to reason that something will go wrong along the way. I also don't have anything to say to the world. At least, not to the world at large. Certain pieces of the population I'd be happy to tell them to DIAF, but overall I'd rather stay under my varying-sized rock and play WoW. So in a dichotomy that is called my life, I have hope that I will post more on this blog after having already decided that I won't have the motivation to keep posting (resulting in it becoming stagnant for another ... however long it was since my last post). Self fulfilling prophecy? Let me tell you something about prophecy.
A prophet is simply one who speaks for another. To receive a prophecy is to receive a message on behalf of another (typically a divine being) so that it can be communicated on the message-sender's behalf. If I were to declare something to be (according to my beliefs that are of my own design) and then act in a way to carry it out, there is no prophecy involved. The "prophecy" is a declarative statement based on what I think is correct. By that logic a "self fulfilling prophecy" does not exist. I am the one creating the message, I am the one declaring the message to others, and then I am the one acting in a way that makes it so.
Huh?
Let me put it this way: I hope to keep updating this blog. I have reason to believe that this blog will NOT be updated as I hope. Past experience with yourspace and this blog have proven that I did not have the motivation to keep updating these things, and nothing has given me reason to believe that things are different now. The logical conclusion is that my hope of updating this blog regularly is misplaced, and any attempt to fulfill that hope is futile. NONE of this paragraph has anything to do with prophecy.
I like to do what I call "express myself." I think you may call it "rambling." Either way, it's what I do. I'm not a concise person; that's no secret and I'll readily admit that. But as long as what I say is interesting enough to not solicit tl;dr comments, then I don't really care.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Just What I've Always Wanted
Well, guess what? I finally got something that I've wanted for quite some time. I finally have a dedicated Unix-like workstation on a reasonably fast computer. It's actually running FreeBSD version 7.0-Prerelease (more info here). I have GNOME set up (GNOME's homepage can be found here) for my graphical environment and basic desktop utilities, and I'd like to become very comfortable using it for everything possible (in an effort to reduce my reliance on Microsoft Windows at home). I don't know how well that will work, but I'm off to a good start (finally). In fact, this blog entry is being written from that very computer. Most of my Unix experience has been on the command line, so installing and configuring all this graphical stuff is somewhat new to me.
I'm also working to get Solaris 10 set up on my Sun Microsystems Ultra 60 Elite 3D workstation. It's a little frustrating, because I haven't used Solaris for nine years (the latest version I used was 2.6). It's pretty much all new to me, but I'm determined to learn it and get more comfortable with it. Why? Because it's fun. Who knows? Maybe it'll help me get a job; it's certainly going to look good on my resume if I can claim that I'm relatively proficient with it.
So let the learning and fun begin.
I'm also working to get Solaris 10 set up on my Sun Microsystems Ultra 60 Elite 3D workstation. It's a little frustrating, because I haven't used Solaris for nine years (the latest version I used was 2.6). It's pretty much all new to me, but I'm determined to learn it and get more comfortable with it. Why? Because it's fun. Who knows? Maybe it'll help me get a job; it's certainly going to look good on my resume if I can claim that I'm relatively proficient with it.
So let the learning and fun begin.
Games
I played my first game of The Spoils yesterday. It was more fun than I thought it would be, and that's a good thing. Unfortunately, my deck didn't seem to be shuffled very well (even though I shuffled it like 20 times), because I kept getting resource cards instead of non-resource cards. It sucked for my friend, but it kinda sucked for me, too, since I really didn't get to experience what would probably be considered "typical" gameplay. We'll try again, and I'll make sure my cards are quite shuffled. Don't know if we'll do it tonight, this weekend, or some other time, but I'm sure we'll play again.
So far, I thought it was pretty fun. I'm not real good with strategy, so as we play more and more I'm going to find that I really do suck at these kinds of games. Maybe not; I might be surprised. We'll just have to wait and see.
So far, I thought it was pretty fun. I'm not real good with strategy, so as we play more and more I'm going to find that I really do suck at these kinds of games. Maybe not; I might be surprised. We'll just have to wait and see.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
The Busy-ness of the Day
I've tucked myself away in a hole at work. Though the door is unlocked and visitors are welcome (though not desired), the lab provides sanctuary for me as I go about my busy-ness. It's a nice change from all the interruptions I get at my desk. I feel like I'm actually accomplishing something. Which is precisely why I'm writing a blog entry instead of working. Hrm... :)
It's not that I don't like my work, it's just that I'd rather be doing something else. I've regained an interest in my computers at home, so after work and on weekends I fill the time quite well. But at work I catch myself longing to be back at home, watering the seeds of interest and learning new things on my computers.
I need to clean my desk. I need to pay bills. I need to clean the bathroom. I need to do laundry. Tonight would be a good night to do that, except that I'm going to play The Spoils with a friend of mine. That means we'll probably be up late and I won't have time to do any of that stuff before bed. I guess it'll have to wait until Friday unless I go back over to my friend's house to play some more. Who knows.
It's almost lunch time, and my day is almost over. I leave today at 13:00 to go to the rec center and then off to play cards. I hope it's fun. But even if it's not, it's the company that really matters, not the game.
It's not that I don't like my work, it's just that I'd rather be doing something else. I've regained an interest in my computers at home, so after work and on weekends I fill the time quite well. But at work I catch myself longing to be back at home, watering the seeds of interest and learning new things on my computers.
I need to clean my desk. I need to pay bills. I need to clean the bathroom. I need to do laundry. Tonight would be a good night to do that, except that I'm going to play The Spoils with a friend of mine. That means we'll probably be up late and I won't have time to do any of that stuff before bed. I guess it'll have to wait until Friday unless I go back over to my friend's house to play some more. Who knows.
It's almost lunch time, and my day is almost over. I leave today at 13:00 to go to the rec center and then off to play cards. I hope it's fun. But even if it's not, it's the company that really matters, not the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)