I was shopping for a headset with a microphone on Saturday, and while I was waiting at the checkout I saw they had on sale a two week trial of World of Warcraft for $2. I've heard mixed things about World of Warcraft, but for me the sticking point has always been the price. About $90 bucks for the game and then $20 or so dollars a month is more than I am willing to pay for a game of that sort. $2 for two weeks though is within the bounds of what I think is a reasonable price.
So after installing, which took a while (I hadn't realised it was a full dvd), it had to update, which was a 465MB download, I finally got to play. The game play is quite repetitive and there's not enough story to keep you interested. The other big problem is travelling between places. The whole wondering around the countryside takes forever, and making my character run in her underwear is only amusing for a few minutes at most (If I have to watch a person run around all day, it's going to be a woman. And it's not like it makes a difference game play wise)
I'll probably play a bit more over the next two weeks, but I don't think it's the great game so many people seem to claim it is.
End Post
Writing time: 20 minutes
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: Six Feet Under (Season 1)
Sunday, August 27, 2006
Friday, August 25, 2006
Limits and Morality
One of my housemates has a habit of getting somewhat philosophical when he gets drunk, and recently this has got me thinking about a few things a bit more than I would usually.
The most recent position he put forward was that the ultimate aspiration/achievement is the freeing oneself of all limitations up to and including morality and the laws of physics. This is achieved through enlightenment, which apparently you only get when it happens, and is not able to be worked towards. Of course, you know you've been enlightened because that's part of the knowledge you get with enlightenment. And no one else can verify this, because enlightenment comes from within, and cannot be taught or worked towards.
He acknowledged that this is very much like traditional religious faith, and occasionally he has delusions of being the antichrist. We have very different notions of truth (For me, truth is the external reality, observable by all). He thinks truth is something internal, individual, and not able to be directly compared with others truth. And that this internal truth outweighs any other evidence if you feel it to be true enough (very much along the line of Stephen Colbert's Truthiness).
But the thing I've been thinking about the most is the whole freeing of all limitations. My thinking crystallised on watching a trailer for the next season of Battlestar Galactica, which was "Somethings you just don't do, colonel. Not even in war."
The idea I have is that being moral takes two steps. The first step is deciding what is good and what is bad. This should always be under consideration, and open for debate, etc. But the second part is then saying, these things I consider bad, I will not do. You limit the things that you are willing to do, based on what you think is good or bad. People will disagree with the what you might think is good or bad, but the restricting yourself to only doing good things is an important part of being a good person.
One other important aspect is that these limits are self imposed. You have decided not to do these things. Being forced to do things by others is still not good. The society you live in and your experiences will obviously have a strong effect on what you choose as good and bad, but ultimately it is your own choice what your actions are.
This idea of good people limiting their action came up on an episode of Penn Jillette's radio show about why should America obey the Geneva conventions, and one of the callers put in a similar idea, that because America wants to be the good guys, they need to live up to a higher standard of behaviour, one that includes not torturing prisoners, not attacking civilians, etc. This again is the idea "I want to be a good person, therefore I will not do bad things".
It does come to mind that this leads to a rather passive idea of good being the avoidance of bad rather than a goal in and of itself. You could look at it a bit like the Hippocratic oath "First do no harm", start out by not making things worse, then actively try to improve them.
In conclusion, I think that to be a moral person one needs to place limitations on themselves.
End Post
Writing time: 25 minutes
Time since last post: 5 days
Current media: Learn Japanese Podcast
Technorati tags: Philosophy, Limitations, Thoughts
The most recent position he put forward was that the ultimate aspiration/achievement is the freeing oneself of all limitations up to and including morality and the laws of physics. This is achieved through enlightenment, which apparently you only get when it happens, and is not able to be worked towards. Of course, you know you've been enlightened because that's part of the knowledge you get with enlightenment. And no one else can verify this, because enlightenment comes from within, and cannot be taught or worked towards.
He acknowledged that this is very much like traditional religious faith, and occasionally he has delusions of being the antichrist. We have very different notions of truth (For me, truth is the external reality, observable by all). He thinks truth is something internal, individual, and not able to be directly compared with others truth. And that this internal truth outweighs any other evidence if you feel it to be true enough (very much along the line of Stephen Colbert's Truthiness).
But the thing I've been thinking about the most is the whole freeing of all limitations. My thinking crystallised on watching a trailer for the next season of Battlestar Galactica, which was "Somethings you just don't do, colonel. Not even in war."
The idea I have is that being moral takes two steps. The first step is deciding what is good and what is bad. This should always be under consideration, and open for debate, etc. But the second part is then saying, these things I consider bad, I will not do. You limit the things that you are willing to do, based on what you think is good or bad. People will disagree with the what you might think is good or bad, but the restricting yourself to only doing good things is an important part of being a good person.
One other important aspect is that these limits are self imposed. You have decided not to do these things. Being forced to do things by others is still not good. The society you live in and your experiences will obviously have a strong effect on what you choose as good and bad, but ultimately it is your own choice what your actions are.
This idea of good people limiting their action came up on an episode of Penn Jillette's radio show about why should America obey the Geneva conventions, and one of the callers put in a similar idea, that because America wants to be the good guys, they need to live up to a higher standard of behaviour, one that includes not torturing prisoners, not attacking civilians, etc. This again is the idea "I want to be a good person, therefore I will not do bad things".
It does come to mind that this leads to a rather passive idea of good being the avoidance of bad rather than a goal in and of itself. You could look at it a bit like the Hippocratic oath "First do no harm", start out by not making things worse, then actively try to improve them.
In conclusion, I think that to be a moral person one needs to place limitations on themselves.
End Post
Writing time: 25 minutes
Time since last post: 5 days
Current media: Learn Japanese Podcast
Technorati tags: Philosophy, Limitations, Thoughts
Sunday, August 20, 2006
The London Terror Thingy
A bit over a week ago it hit the news that the poms had busted a group of people who were planning on blowing up some planes in mid air. The plan allegedly involved using a binary liquid explosive smuggled onto the plane in component form and mixed up on the plane. Since then the governments have enforced a stupidly high level of security at airports, A huge number of people have either had flights delayed or cancelled, and the media has gone on another fear mongering frenzy.
My initial reaction was that the heightened security and so forth was a massive overreaction, which I still say is the case. There are several reasons for this.
First, there is the way this plot was detected. This was achieved through old fashioned crime detection techniques. It did not need any of the extra powers governments have said they needed to detect this sort of thing and all the extra security added to airports wouldn't have done any better than the security a decade ago. So if the tools we had before we did any upgrading due to terrorism are working, what justification is there for extra powers that come at a great cost to our civil liberties.
The second reason has come from some articles I've come across on the nature of binary explosives, and in particular the chemicals that were supposed to be used in this plot. Binary liquid explosives are popular in movies (see Die Hard with a Vengeance for an example) but are not as practical in real life. The chemicals that were alleged to have been used are especially impractical. One of the reactants is very reactive, and difficult to safely store, and has a very strong odor, making it very hard to get onto a plane (a shampoo bottle is not a safe container for this stuff). The other chemical is not as troublesome, but the mixing process is. Firstly, it's a very exothermic reaction, and the completed explosive is very sensitive to shock and temperature. To make enough of it to sufficiently damage a plane requires a significant amount of time, and even if you try doing it in the bathroom so the person sitting next to you doesn't ask what it is that you're mixing up, after an hour or two in there, someone going to complain to the crew. Premixing isn't going to work either, because of the sensitivity of the final product. (The main source for this is the Interesting People mailing list, the actual message is here. There is a followup that describes an binary explosive used in demining here.)
A third factor is a few of the things I've heard about the people arrested. There was no great knowledge of chemistry, no detailed plans of what was to be done, no plane tickets had been bought, and some didn't even have a passport (more info here).
The media has had a field day with the sensational aspects of these events, but haven't looked at all the details that mean it's not as bad as they were saying. Over in America, CNN spent a whole day scaring its viewers about how vulnerable they were.
End Post
Writing time: 41 minutes
Time since last post: 4 days
Current media: Bullshit!
My initial reaction was that the heightened security and so forth was a massive overreaction, which I still say is the case. There are several reasons for this.
First, there is the way this plot was detected. This was achieved through old fashioned crime detection techniques. It did not need any of the extra powers governments have said they needed to detect this sort of thing and all the extra security added to airports wouldn't have done any better than the security a decade ago. So if the tools we had before we did any upgrading due to terrorism are working, what justification is there for extra powers that come at a great cost to our civil liberties.
The second reason has come from some articles I've come across on the nature of binary explosives, and in particular the chemicals that were supposed to be used in this plot. Binary liquid explosives are popular in movies (see Die Hard with a Vengeance for an example) but are not as practical in real life. The chemicals that were alleged to have been used are especially impractical. One of the reactants is very reactive, and difficult to safely store, and has a very strong odor, making it very hard to get onto a plane (a shampoo bottle is not a safe container for this stuff). The other chemical is not as troublesome, but the mixing process is. Firstly, it's a very exothermic reaction, and the completed explosive is very sensitive to shock and temperature. To make enough of it to sufficiently damage a plane requires a significant amount of time, and even if you try doing it in the bathroom so the person sitting next to you doesn't ask what it is that you're mixing up, after an hour or two in there, someone going to complain to the crew. Premixing isn't going to work either, because of the sensitivity of the final product. (The main source for this is the Interesting People mailing list, the actual message is here. There is a followup that describes an binary explosive used in demining here.)
A third factor is a few of the things I've heard about the people arrested. There was no great knowledge of chemistry, no detailed plans of what was to be done, no plane tickets had been bought, and some didn't even have a passport (more info here).
The media has had a field day with the sensational aspects of these events, but haven't looked at all the details that mean it's not as bad as they were saying. Over in America, CNN spent a whole day scaring its viewers about how vulnerable they were.
End Post
Writing time: 41 minutes
Time since last post: 4 days
Current media: Bullshit!
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Threatdown
For all you Steven Colbert fans, have a look at the Threatdown Generator.
In real world news, a cease fire has commenced between Lebanon and Israel. And about bloody time. Israel this time has really responded with much more than necessary force. Bombing civilians, hospitals and refugee camps while trying to get to Hezbollah will not make you friends in the Lebanese community. Nor will it get you friends in the peace loving community.
Israel is in a tough position. The nations neighbouring and around Israel know it's history, and know people who were affected by it's creation. They also know people who have been attacked by Israel. This is not Israel's first prolonged engagement with countries neighbouring it. There have been about 20 or so conflicts of various lengths since the creation of Israel. Israel has generally done well in these conflicts, such as the gains made in the 6 Day War.
Israel appears to have generally tried to play the role of the good guy, just trying to protect itself from others. This is partly true, it's neighbour don't particularly like it. But if you play the good guy card, then you limit your options if you don't want to lose that appearance. Good guys don't kill innocent civilians. Good guys don't bomb refugee camps.
I think Israel needs to change it's strategy. For as long as it's existed, Israel has believed a good defense involves a good offense. This has some truth, but doesn't consider the larger picture. Every time Israel kills someones family member, they make more people in the region dislike them. What Israel should do is draw a line in the sand (it's borders, for example), and say "no one crosses this line". They then set up on fine defense along that line. This shouldn't be hard. Israel knows their stuff. Nothing crosses the line, be it tank, jet or missile. But they don't strike back. Pure defense.
This has several positive factors to Israel. First, it allows them to keep up the good guy image with the rest of the world. Second, it makes it harder for neighbouring countries to maintain anger against them. Once you get a generation or two that have never had to worry about Israel striking out at them, they're much less likely to strike back at Israel.
The downside to such a scheme is that it will be unpopular with those who want the fight to continue.
Anyway, that's my idea on how Israel should proceed.
End Post
Writing time: 3 hours (I'm pretty sure I didn't take the whole 3 hours. There was a bit of reading up on the conflicts Israel has been in, and listening to a few podcasts. and answering phone calls)
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: silence. A few podcast played while I was typing.
Technorati tags: Israel, Peace, thoughts
Monday, August 14, 2006
Buy or Rent?
Buying a house is a huge deal. The amount of money needed to buy a house is more than I've had in my entire life, total (well maybe not an absolute dump in the middle of nowhere, but nothing worth living in).
There are people out there who advocate that buying a house is better than renting, because if you are renting your just making someone else's mortgage payments, so why not make your own payments and have an asset at the end of the process. Plus there is the security of owning your own home, etc.
Recently I've been thinking this is not the way to go. The big reason for this is interest. The interest on an average home loan is a bit more than the actual amount borrowed. Yay compound interest. So for every dollar of house you get, you pay another dollar to the bank. This is the killer. Let's say I rent a house, and I manage to save an amount of money equal to my rent each week. This is about the same ratio of interest to principle. 1 dollar to the house provider, one dollar to savings. At the end of the process, assuming the payments are about the same size, the home owner has paid a certain amount of money and got a house worth about half that amount of money. The renter has paid the same amount, doesn't have a house, but does have cash of about the value of the house. Plus they will have all the interest on that cash. And remember, interest on the mortgage was about as much as the principle. And even if the interest rate for savings accounts is a lot less than the interest rate for mortgages, it's still going to add up. And that doesn't even consider the possibility of investing the money somewhere where it will earn you even more money.
Now this analysis ignores a few factors, like rates, inflation, increase in the value of land, insurance, etc. Without thinking about it too much, I think these other factors would tend to balance out.
So it looks like I've got a long future of renting ahead of me, and hopefully my savings will grow as I go along. Of course, to do that, I need a god damned job.
End Post
Writing time: 16 minutes
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: silence
There are people out there who advocate that buying a house is better than renting, because if you are renting your just making someone else's mortgage payments, so why not make your own payments and have an asset at the end of the process. Plus there is the security of owning your own home, etc.
Recently I've been thinking this is not the way to go. The big reason for this is interest. The interest on an average home loan is a bit more than the actual amount borrowed. Yay compound interest. So for every dollar of house you get, you pay another dollar to the bank. This is the killer. Let's say I rent a house, and I manage to save an amount of money equal to my rent each week. This is about the same ratio of interest to principle. 1 dollar to the house provider, one dollar to savings. At the end of the process, assuming the payments are about the same size, the home owner has paid a certain amount of money and got a house worth about half that amount of money. The renter has paid the same amount, doesn't have a house, but does have cash of about the value of the house. Plus they will have all the interest on that cash. And remember, interest on the mortgage was about as much as the principle. And even if the interest rate for savings accounts is a lot less than the interest rate for mortgages, it's still going to add up. And that doesn't even consider the possibility of investing the money somewhere where it will earn you even more money.
Now this analysis ignores a few factors, like rates, inflation, increase in the value of land, insurance, etc. Without thinking about it too much, I think these other factors would tend to balance out.
So it looks like I've got a long future of renting ahead of me, and hopefully my savings will grow as I go along. Of course, to do that, I need a god damned job.
End Post
Writing time: 16 minutes
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: silence
Saturday, August 12, 2006
A Coffin Too Small
I got back from Rocky on Friday. I got a plane back. The plane I caught was not a jet plane, but propeller based. A bit smaller than the jet I got up there, but the flight time was the same and everything else was pretty much the same.
The funeral for Mal's mother was more religious than Mal's at the beginning of the year. It was led by a minister instead of just some guy from the funeral director. There was a more religious bent to the reflection from the minister.
One thing that got to me was that the coffin seemed to small for her to fit in. I remember thinking something similar at Mal's funeral. Perhaps if I'd been able to go to the viewing of the body (morbid as that seems) I'd be able to see if they actually fit without problem in the box. Admittedly it doesn't really matter to them if they are squashed into the box, but it is a little undignified.
Also, for something due to be cremated, the box seemed quite sturdy and elaborate. If I ever get to the point of specifying such things, I'm to go in the simplest, plainest box possible, cremated and my ashes then sent either into deep space or the sun (I'm not sure which yet. Both have a certain eloquence). I don't know if I'd want some sort of memorial plaque thingy (instead of an actual thing on the earth with my ashes). Graveyards really depress me, and is not a place where I'd want to spend a great deal of time in, even if I was a pile of ashes.
Mal's father handled this funeral a lot better than he did Mal's. He was aware of what was going on and even had a few drinks at the wake. At Mal's funeral he had a fit outside before the event and was taken back to his hospital unconscious before the service started. This was good as it prevented further distress for the family.
End Post
Writing time: 26 minutes
Time since last post: 4 days
Current media: He Died With A Felafel In His Hand (the movie)
The funeral for Mal's mother was more religious than Mal's at the beginning of the year. It was led by a minister instead of just some guy from the funeral director. There was a more religious bent to the reflection from the minister.
One thing that got to me was that the coffin seemed to small for her to fit in. I remember thinking something similar at Mal's funeral. Perhaps if I'd been able to go to the viewing of the body (morbid as that seems) I'd be able to see if they actually fit without problem in the box. Admittedly it doesn't really matter to them if they are squashed into the box, but it is a little undignified.
Also, for something due to be cremated, the box seemed quite sturdy and elaborate. If I ever get to the point of specifying such things, I'm to go in the simplest, plainest box possible, cremated and my ashes then sent either into deep space or the sun (I'm not sure which yet. Both have a certain eloquence). I don't know if I'd want some sort of memorial plaque thingy (instead of an actual thing on the earth with my ashes). Graveyards really depress me, and is not a place where I'd want to spend a great deal of time in, even if I was a pile of ashes.
Mal's father handled this funeral a lot better than he did Mal's. He was aware of what was going on and even had a few drinks at the wake. At Mal's funeral he had a fit outside before the event and was taken back to his hospital unconscious before the service started. This was good as it prevented further distress for the family.
End Post
Writing time: 26 minutes
Time since last post: 4 days
Current media: He Died With A Felafel In His Hand (the movie)
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Rubbish In Rubbish Out
Note: This is based on stuff I wrote during job search training today. I'm sure I've previously mentioned how unproductive such activities are. I'll note in the text chronological shifts
What is the point of this? After 1 day of job search training I am less motivated and more morose than I have been for some time. I've been through this process before. I know all the stuff they're spouting. I also know the biggest thing hold me back right now is the lack of references, which they can't really help me with.
The moroseness is worrying. I think two weeks of this will not leave me in a good frame of mind.
I'm not sure if part of this is due to the death of my mothers mother-in-law (step grandmother) (almost in law, but close enough). She's been on a steady decline for the past year or so. She's had a few strokes and slipped into a few comas over the last few months, so while the passing was not wanted, it was really just a matter of time.
A few weeks ago I visited her with Mum and she was stuck in her bed unable to get out or even sit up. She was also unable to speak in complete sentences while I was there.
(abrupt change in flow due to taking a break)
It's definitely the job search training. While popping over to Coles to get a drink I was much more cheerful while walking around. Now I'm back in the training and the depression is seeping in again.
While at Coles I saw an old lady with a shopping bag with a ration card printed on it. I thought it was worth mentioning.
Anyway, back to the previous topic.
Seeing someone be unable to move or communicate is really one of the sorrowful states of being. I do not want to end up in that condition. Hopefully by the time it's a serious risk for me brain implants will be around so I could still use a computer to communicate
(that ends the stuff written at job search training, now in real time)
Hopefully I will survive job search training.
End Post
Writing time: 46 minutes
Time since last post: 7 days
Current media: Not much
Another Note: I do realize that Garbage In, Garbage Out is the usual phrasing for the concept referred to in the post title, but the job search trainer used it, so it reflects the overall futility of the job search training program.
What is the point of this? After 1 day of job search training I am less motivated and more morose than I have been for some time. I've been through this process before. I know all the stuff they're spouting. I also know the biggest thing hold me back right now is the lack of references, which they can't really help me with.
The moroseness is worrying. I think two weeks of this will not leave me in a good frame of mind.
I'm not sure if part of this is due to the death of my mothers mother-in-law (step grandmother) (almost in law, but close enough). She's been on a steady decline for the past year or so. She's had a few strokes and slipped into a few comas over the last few months, so while the passing was not wanted, it was really just a matter of time.
A few weeks ago I visited her with Mum and she was stuck in her bed unable to get out or even sit up. She was also unable to speak in complete sentences while I was there.
(abrupt change in flow due to taking a break)
It's definitely the job search training. While popping over to Coles to get a drink I was much more cheerful while walking around. Now I'm back in the training and the depression is seeping in again.
While at Coles I saw an old lady with a shopping bag with a ration card printed on it. I thought it was worth mentioning.
Anyway, back to the previous topic.
Seeing someone be unable to move or communicate is really one of the sorrowful states of being. I do not want to end up in that condition. Hopefully by the time it's a serious risk for me brain implants will be around so I could still use a computer to communicate
(that ends the stuff written at job search training, now in real time)
Hopefully I will survive job search training.
End Post
Writing time: 46 minutes
Time since last post: 7 days
Current media: Not much
Another Note: I do realize that Garbage In, Garbage Out is the usual phrasing for the concept referred to in the post title, but the job search trainer used it, so it reflects the overall futility of the job search training program.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Scary law
I was reading slashdot today, an article about a guy getting arrested for taking a photo of some police officers arresting someone else. One of the posts pointed out this gem of a law from Montana.
45-7-302. Obstructing peace officer or other public servant
The first clause says that it's a crime to interfere or obstruct criminal investigations, preservation of the peace and government functions. Understandable. Government functions might be pushing things if it's interpreted widely.
The third clause just establishes the penalty. No more than $500 and/or 6 months in prison. Although 6 months in prison is a lot harsher than $500, jail time is probably for the more malovent justice obstructors.
The second clause is the scary and very dangerous part. It is not a defense if the officer in question is acting illegally in trying to accomplish their duty. This is bad. This I would go so far as to say, is unconstitutional in America. This law makes it an offense to demand that the police abide by the 4th and 5th ammendments. For example, if a cop comes to your house and wants to do a search but doesn't have a warrant, if you insist that they have to get a warrant before searching, you're now obstructing justice, and the fact that the cop was trying to do something illegal isn't going to help you when you try and plead your case.
It's also bad because it allows a group of people to ignore certain aspects of the law. One of the keystones of modern democracies is that the law applies equally to everyone. This law states that peace officers can ignore certain laws. This is a bad precedent. No one should be exempt from the consequences of breaking the law. Especially not the group of people entrusted with enforcing the law.
There is also the fact that when officers use illegal means to get evidence, that evidence, nor any evidence derived from it, can not be used in court. This does mean some people will get off charges where the police have not acted properly. This is needed to stop the police abusing power. There have been incidents where people have insisted that police get warrants and so forth before they would divulge information to the police, and these have usually had people in government deriding the people who insisted on the police following the law. This is not a good approach from those in power.
Ultimately, people have certain rights that should not be denied except under extraordinary conditions. This law from Montana makes it harder for individuals to defend their rights, and because of that is a bad law.
45-7-302. Obstructing peace officer or other public servant
The first clause says that it's a crime to interfere or obstruct criminal investigations, preservation of the peace and government functions. Understandable. Government functions might be pushing things if it's interpreted widely.
The third clause just establishes the penalty. No more than $500 and/or 6 months in prison. Although 6 months in prison is a lot harsher than $500, jail time is probably for the more malovent justice obstructors.
The second clause is the scary and very dangerous part. It is not a defense if the officer in question is acting illegally in trying to accomplish their duty. This is bad. This I would go so far as to say, is unconstitutional in America. This law makes it an offense to demand that the police abide by the 4th and 5th ammendments. For example, if a cop comes to your house and wants to do a search but doesn't have a warrant, if you insist that they have to get a warrant before searching, you're now obstructing justice, and the fact that the cop was trying to do something illegal isn't going to help you when you try and plead your case.
It's also bad because it allows a group of people to ignore certain aspects of the law. One of the keystones of modern democracies is that the law applies equally to everyone. This law states that peace officers can ignore certain laws. This is a bad precedent. No one should be exempt from the consequences of breaking the law. Especially not the group of people entrusted with enforcing the law.
There is also the fact that when officers use illegal means to get evidence, that evidence, nor any evidence derived from it, can not be used in court. This does mean some people will get off charges where the police have not acted properly. This is needed to stop the police abusing power. There have been incidents where people have insisted that police get warrants and so forth before they would divulge information to the police, and these have usually had people in government deriding the people who insisted on the police following the law. This is not a good approach from those in power.
Ultimately, people have certain rights that should not be denied except under extraordinary conditions. This law from Montana makes it harder for individuals to defend their rights, and because of that is a bad law.
Saturday, July 29, 2006
Rich Girl Not So Rich
I first heard Gwen Stefani's cover of If I were A Rich Man titled If I Were A Rich Girl while I was visiting my sister in Thailand last year while browsing in a music store. I didn't listen too much, but given that I'm somewhat of a fan of covers and parodies of songs, I was mildly interested.
It was a little while later that I found out who the artist was, and listened a bit more to the lyrics. When I did this, I realized just how much she and her collaborators had missed the point of the song.
In Fiddler on the Roof, the song starts out saying how if Tevye (one of the main characters from the musical) was rich, he wouldn't have to work, would have a big house, lots of animals, materialistic things. But then it turns to other things. Freeing his wife from the burden of having to do all the housework. Gaining respect from his neighbours, and them asking him for advice. And then finally he would be able to spend time to study the Torah, and spend more time praying. The song starts out materialistic, but comes round and shows that the main thing that Tevye would gain from it is being able to not worry about the mundane things like having food to eat and a roof to sleep under but concern himself with the more important (well, less materialistic, more spiritual) things in life.
In comparison, Gwen Stefani's version is about all the glittering things money can buy, and people wanting to know you just because you're rich. It does not look at other aspects of what having money can do for you. It's shallow, and misses the point of the original.
I could say that this is a symptom of the moral and cultural decline of modern society, but such claims have been made since the days of Socrates. And anyway, reality TV fills that role. I think my main point is that Gwen Stefani and co are shallow and missed the point of the song the were redoing. And the point of the original is a point worth making.
End Post
Writing time: 31 minutes
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: Firefly
It was a little while later that I found out who the artist was, and listened a bit more to the lyrics. When I did this, I realized just how much she and her collaborators had missed the point of the song.
In Fiddler on the Roof, the song starts out saying how if Tevye (one of the main characters from the musical) was rich, he wouldn't have to work, would have a big house, lots of animals, materialistic things. But then it turns to other things. Freeing his wife from the burden of having to do all the housework. Gaining respect from his neighbours, and them asking him for advice. And then finally he would be able to spend time to study the Torah, and spend more time praying. The song starts out materialistic, but comes round and shows that the main thing that Tevye would gain from it is being able to not worry about the mundane things like having food to eat and a roof to sleep under but concern himself with the more important (well, less materialistic, more spiritual) things in life.
In comparison, Gwen Stefani's version is about all the glittering things money can buy, and people wanting to know you just because you're rich. It does not look at other aspects of what having money can do for you. It's shallow, and misses the point of the original.
I could say that this is a symptom of the moral and cultural decline of modern society, but such claims have been made since the days of Socrates. And anyway, reality TV fills that role. I think my main point is that Gwen Stefani and co are shallow and missed the point of the song the were redoing. And the point of the original is a point worth making.
End Post
Writing time: 31 minutes
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: Firefly
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Blue Sun
When I got my first chunk of cash from the work I did on Rent A Coder, one thing I did was to splurge on a t-shirt. And not just any T-short. I got me a Blue Sun t-shirt.
Now, I think most people who might read this will be wondering just what the hell is so special about a Blue Sun shirt. I will say that Blue Sun has a wikipedia entry, and those interested can look it up.
At the moment I'm still considering something big, and while having mostly made up my mind, am still a bit wary. More on that when I am more certain about the matter.
I bought a book on to read on the flight back from Townsville on Wednesday, The Great Philosophers. It's a series of articles on some of the big names in philosophy and what they were about. So far I've got through Socrates and most of the way through Plato, and next up is Descartes. Also in the list is Turing, which should be interesting. Look forward to a few more philosophical posts in the near future.
End Post
Writing time: 22 minutes
Time since last post: 13 days
Current media: iTunes Shuffle
Technorati tags: Blue Sun, stuff, rambling
Now, I think most people who might read this will be wondering just what the hell is so special about a Blue Sun shirt. I will say that Blue Sun has a wikipedia entry, and those interested can look it up.
At the moment I'm still considering something big, and while having mostly made up my mind, am still a bit wary. More on that when I am more certain about the matter.
I bought a book on to read on the flight back from Townsville on Wednesday, The Great Philosophers. It's a series of articles on some of the big names in philosophy and what they were about. So far I've got through Socrates and most of the way through Plato, and next up is Descartes. Also in the list is Turing, which should be interesting. Look forward to a few more philosophical posts in the near future.
End Post
Writing time: 22 minutes
Time since last post: 13 days
Current media: iTunes Shuffle
Technorati tags: Blue Sun, stuff, rambling
Saturday, July 15, 2006
a Cool quote
Here's a cool quote from a slashdot poll for people's favorite pirate
"I've found that brothels make for a surer investment than merchant ships. Whores rarely sink, and when they're boarded by pirates, they come away richer instead of poorer."
"I've found that brothels make for a surer investment than merchant ships. Whores rarely sink, and when they're boarded by pirates, they come away richer instead of poorer."
Thursday, July 06, 2006
The Return of the Extended Kingdom
While I was on the train back from Rockhampton earlier this week, I got motivated and did some writing on the Extended Kingdom (see previous posts here and here). Not so much a story as a what could be considered a rough wikipedia entry on the Kingdom. Anyway the following is a transcription of what I wrote with some editing. Some of it recaps material in previous posts on the topic, but that's the way things happen.
Notes on the Extended Kingdom
The Extended Kingdom is a spacefaring civilization whose government is a constitutional monarchy. It is located in a small star cluster with most stars separated by distances of between 5 and 20 light years.
The Extended Kingdom currently occupies 4 solar systems. In its home system two planets in addition to the home world are inhabited, along with a few moons and many space habitats. The other systems are less densely populated, with just the most suitable world in each colonized and a number of habitats supporting the colony.
The Extended Kingdom has possessed faster than light for about 600 years but has not been able to travel faster than 13 times the speed of light, and travel is only practical at up to 6 times the speed of light. At this speed, trips between systems take between 8 to 18 months. Communication between systems is much quicker than physical travel, the longest delays in signals being about a minute or so.
The government of the Extended Kingdom is divided into three levels. The Grand Parliament governs the entire kingdom. Cities and Habitats have a local government that is responsible for administrating local affairs. Between these two levels sits the planetary government. Each planet has a planet wide government that exists mainly to centralize tasks that are more effectively dealt with on a larger scale (e.g., long distance infrastructure).
The Grand Parliament consists of three houses. The first is the House of Locales, and it's members are elected by the citizens of allocated regions, with each region having roughly the same population. The second house is the House of Metropolitans, which is made up of two representatives of each city or habitat administration. The last house is the House of Numbers. The House of Numbers has the same number of members as the House of Locales, but members are elected by a proportional ballot from a single electorate that covers the entire kingdom.
Members of the Houses of Numbers, Locales and Metropolitans are elected every two, three and six years respectively. The Metropolitans are staggered so one member from each local administration is replaced at each election for the House of Locales. The method of appointing the Metropolitans depends on the local administration. In some they are appointed by the administration, some are put up for direct election, and some are chosen based on the outcome of elections for the House of Locales.
The monarch of the Extended Kingdom is largely a symbolic figure, but does play a role in advancing social issues, and the degree to which this has been done depends on the reigning monarch.
The Extended Kingdom has grown from humble beginnings, and the monarchy traces back an unbroken line to the founder of the Kingdom of Antarius, Brilthang the Gruesome. Antarius started out as a small city-state, which Brilthang took control of after overthrowing the cruel tyrant Frimbar. He was well loved by the people of the city, Brilthang led Antarius in conquering nine other nearby city-states over the next twenty years.
Antarius then existed as one of eight nations on the main continent of the kingdom's homeworld. For a few centuries various conflicts moved back and forth between the nations, with shifting alliances and much use of subterfuge as well as actual warfare. Antarius broke this equilibrium when it went on a massive offensive after suffering a sneak attack from one of its most trusted ally. This success is attributed to Tilan, later called the Magnificent, who was the king at the time. Tilan was the first leader to realize the potential of several new technologies at the time including that of gunpowder, which was just being introduced to warfare.
As Antarius was consolidating its control of the continent, explorers returned having reached several new continents, and having established relations with two nations on other continents, Gerem and Sevant. The three nations co-existed for a few centuries until Gerem and Sevant were not conquered so much as absorbed. The absorption of the other nations was prompted by the surge in economic power that followed from Antarius' change from a feudal government to a limited form of constitutional monarchy. It was at this point the Kingdom of Antarius controlled the whole of it's world.
That's it for now. It's only taken me about a year to write some more of this stuff.
End Post
Writing time: 3 hours
Time since last post: 0 days
Current media: Quiet
Notes on the Extended Kingdom
The Extended Kingdom is a spacefaring civilization whose government is a constitutional monarchy. It is located in a small star cluster with most stars separated by distances of between 5 and 20 light years.
The Extended Kingdom currently occupies 4 solar systems. In its home system two planets in addition to the home world are inhabited, along with a few moons and many space habitats. The other systems are less densely populated, with just the most suitable world in each colonized and a number of habitats supporting the colony.
The Extended Kingdom has possessed faster than light for about 600 years but has not been able to travel faster than 13 times the speed of light, and travel is only practical at up to 6 times the speed of light. At this speed, trips between systems take between 8 to 18 months. Communication between systems is much quicker than physical travel, the longest delays in signals being about a minute or so.
The government of the Extended Kingdom is divided into three levels. The Grand Parliament governs the entire kingdom. Cities and Habitats have a local government that is responsible for administrating local affairs. Between these two levels sits the planetary government. Each planet has a planet wide government that exists mainly to centralize tasks that are more effectively dealt with on a larger scale (e.g., long distance infrastructure).
The Grand Parliament consists of three houses. The first is the House of Locales, and it's members are elected by the citizens of allocated regions, with each region having roughly the same population. The second house is the House of Metropolitans, which is made up of two representatives of each city or habitat administration. The last house is the House of Numbers. The House of Numbers has the same number of members as the House of Locales, but members are elected by a proportional ballot from a single electorate that covers the entire kingdom.
Members of the Houses of Numbers, Locales and Metropolitans are elected every two, three and six years respectively. The Metropolitans are staggered so one member from each local administration is replaced at each election for the House of Locales. The method of appointing the Metropolitans depends on the local administration. In some they are appointed by the administration, some are put up for direct election, and some are chosen based on the outcome of elections for the House of Locales.
The monarch of the Extended Kingdom is largely a symbolic figure, but does play a role in advancing social issues, and the degree to which this has been done depends on the reigning monarch.
The Extended Kingdom has grown from humble beginnings, and the monarchy traces back an unbroken line to the founder of the Kingdom of Antarius, Brilthang the Gruesome. Antarius started out as a small city-state, which Brilthang took control of after overthrowing the cruel tyrant Frimbar. He was well loved by the people of the city, Brilthang led Antarius in conquering nine other nearby city-states over the next twenty years.
Antarius then existed as one of eight nations on the main continent of the kingdom's homeworld. For a few centuries various conflicts moved back and forth between the nations, with shifting alliances and much use of subterfuge as well as actual warfare. Antarius broke this equilibrium when it went on a massive offensive after suffering a sneak attack from one of its most trusted ally. This success is attributed to Tilan, later called the Magnificent, who was the king at the time. Tilan was the first leader to realize the potential of several new technologies at the time including that of gunpowder, which was just being introduced to warfare.
As Antarius was consolidating its control of the continent, explorers returned having reached several new continents, and having established relations with two nations on other continents, Gerem and Sevant. The three nations co-existed for a few centuries until Gerem and Sevant were not conquered so much as absorbed. The absorption of the other nations was prompted by the surge in economic power that followed from Antarius' change from a feudal government to a limited form of constitutional monarchy. It was at this point the Kingdom of Antarius controlled the whole of it's world.
That's it for now. It's only taken me about a year to write some more of this stuff.
End Post
Writing time: 3 hours
Time since last post: 0 days
Current media: Quiet
A Trip to Rocky
On Tuesday the internment of Mal's ashes took place. Mum and his family have taken some time deciding what should be done with the ashes. Just a few close friends and some family attended. I was mainly there just to give Mum support. I also did manage to paraphrase a quote from a volume of The Sandman. I'm sure Neil Gaiman got it from somewhere else, but that's where I got the bit I said. Things weren't made easier by the fact that Mal's mother had a few strokes the night before.
Monday was spent traveling up to Rocky in Mum's newish car. I did a stint of driving that day. I did pretty much all the driving on Tuesday, and a little on Wednesday (to the train station) before catching a train back to Brisbane.
Anyway, it wasn't really a fun trip, but it was good to see there are a lot of people giving Mum support.
End Post
Writing time: 30 minutes
Time since last post: 15 days
Current media: Scrubs
Monday was spent traveling up to Rocky in Mum's newish car. I did a stint of driving that day. I did pretty much all the driving on Tuesday, and a little on Wednesday (to the train station) before catching a train back to Brisbane.
Anyway, it wasn't really a fun trip, but it was good to see there are a lot of people giving Mum support.
End Post
Writing time: 30 minutes
Time since last post: 15 days
Current media: Scrubs
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
The way of the world
A few days ago, to try and solve a few problems I'd been having with my computer, I did a reinstall of Windows. Once this was done I realized that because windows gives programs so many different user spaces to store stuff, some of the things I would have liked to have backed up, I hadn't.
One of the things I hadn't backed up was the search engines used in the search bar in firefox. Those of you using internet explorer probably don't know the joys of the search box, but it is quite useful. Through it you can use any number of search engines without having to go to their actual page and the cumulative time saving is significant.
Anyway, while going through the steps to put back the extra search options I wanted (Google AU, Wikipedia and IMDB), I decided to have a look at the top 25 installed options. Among them are four different languages of Wikipedia (English 2, German 20, Swedish 21, and Spanish 25), and more impressively 5 torrent sites, including the now even more infamous thepiratebay.org.
Given that firefox is the fastest growing browser in terms of market share, and has already taken a chunk out of internet explorer, it's worth noting that a fair number of these people use torrent sites so much that it's worthwhile making it easier to do so.
This also shows that groups like RIAA and MPAA are not succeeding when they try to stop this sort of copyright infringement. It also suggests that what people really want is easy and convenient media. But this is not a terribly original thought.
End Post
Writing time: 30 minutes
Time since last post: 3 days
Current media: Absolute Power
One of the things I hadn't backed up was the search engines used in the search bar in firefox. Those of you using internet explorer probably don't know the joys of the search box, but it is quite useful. Through it you can use any number of search engines without having to go to their actual page and the cumulative time saving is significant.
Anyway, while going through the steps to put back the extra search options I wanted (Google AU, Wikipedia and IMDB), I decided to have a look at the top 25 installed options. Among them are four different languages of Wikipedia (English 2, German 20, Swedish 21, and Spanish 25), and more impressively 5 torrent sites, including the now even more infamous thepiratebay.org.
Given that firefox is the fastest growing browser in terms of market share, and has already taken a chunk out of internet explorer, it's worth noting that a fair number of these people use torrent sites so much that it's worthwhile making it easier to do so.
This also shows that groups like RIAA and MPAA are not succeeding when they try to stop this sort of copyright infringement. It also suggests that what people really want is easy and convenient media. But this is not a terribly original thought.
End Post
Writing time: 30 minutes
Time since last post: 3 days
Current media: Absolute Power
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Rent A Me
So last week I actually managed to earn some money. I've started putting in tenders for work on Rent A Coder, a site that lets people do private contracting for computer based jobs (programming and web site stuff). The first job I did was just some proof reading some stuff for a guy. I did that real cheap because Rent A Coder has a reputation system, so I thought getting some cred was more important than getting some cash. The second job I did was helping a lady with the settings for her blog, which wasn't too complicated, and worked out ok. I got a bit more for that job, and she seemed quite happy as I got a bonus on top of the agreed upon fee.
I queried centrelink about how I should treat these small contracts with regard to my job searching requirements, and they said that I'd be better of with their paperwork just reporting regular jobs I've applied for. I'm going to compromise by just putting tenders I win on the forms. They also recommended I get an ABN, as they don't really like individuals essentially working for cash in hand. I've asked Mum about if it's worthwhile getting an ABN. I guess it would allow me to claim depreciation on my computer as an expense on my taxes, although I think there's a bit where you have to scale it with regards to how much is personal use and how much is business use.
One downside of Rent A Coder is that a lot of people wanting articles designed to do well in search engines and links to make their sites look more important, but I'm avoiding those sorts of jobs, and sticking with mostly technical stuff.
It's also made me want to add to my computer skills, to learn some PHP and mySQL stuff. I'm probably going to set up VMWare on my computer so that I can try that on a Linux machine without having to get another computer.
End Post
Writing time: 1 hour, 10 minutes
Time since last post: 4 days
Current media: Penn Radio
I queried centrelink about how I should treat these small contracts with regard to my job searching requirements, and they said that I'd be better of with their paperwork just reporting regular jobs I've applied for. I'm going to compromise by just putting tenders I win on the forms. They also recommended I get an ABN, as they don't really like individuals essentially working for cash in hand. I've asked Mum about if it's worthwhile getting an ABN. I guess it would allow me to claim depreciation on my computer as an expense on my taxes, although I think there's a bit where you have to scale it with regards to how much is personal use and how much is business use.
One downside of Rent A Coder is that a lot of people wanting articles designed to do well in search engines and links to make their sites look more important, but I'm avoiding those sorts of jobs, and sticking with mostly technical stuff.
It's also made me want to add to my computer skills, to learn some PHP and mySQL stuff. I'm probably going to set up VMWare on my computer so that I can try that on a Linux machine without having to get another computer.
End Post
Writing time: 1 hour, 10 minutes
Time since last post: 4 days
Current media: Penn Radio
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
This morning I listened to the BBC world news' latest podcast, and I heard a bit about some suicides at the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. Three of the detainees committed suicide a few days ago, hanging themselves from sheets. The three had previously been involved in hunger strikes. One was apparently due to be released in a few days, but hadn't been told.
Now what really truly amazes me is the comments of the guy in charge of Guantanamo Bay. Navy Rear-Admiral Harry Harris made the following statement about the deaths
"They are smart; they are creative; they are committed. They have no regard for life, neither ours nor their own. I believe this was not an act of desperation but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us."
This is a pretty messed up statement. Few suicides are acts of violence against others (suicide bombers are the obvious exception). These most definitely aren't. These are people who have been held against will, without trial, without charge, without even the chance to talk to the red cross unsupervised. Their deaths are not an act of aggression. They were acts of desperation by men who no longer had control of their fates.
An act of war is a very specific set of actions. Acts of war are done on a nation-state level. I, personally cannot make an act of war. I, as a person, cannot declare war. No person, acting on their own behalf can commit an act of war. A prisoner committing suicide is not an act of war.
Harry Harris really needs to have a long think about the job he does and the things he says. Surely he must know that the rest of the world is not impressed with the existence of Guantanamo Bay. This sort of aggressive bullshit with no empathy with those being held by the guy in charge is not going to improve the way people think about the place. Harry's bosses should seriously think about how he's doing his job (although given who his bosses are, they may not think he has much to answer to).
Sydney Morning Herald
News.com.au
End Post
Writing time: 35 minutes
Time since last post: 1 day
Current media: Geeknights
Now what really truly amazes me is the comments of the guy in charge of Guantanamo Bay. Navy Rear-Admiral Harry Harris made the following statement about the deaths
"They are smart; they are creative; they are committed. They have no regard for life, neither ours nor their own. I believe this was not an act of desperation but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us."
This is a pretty messed up statement. Few suicides are acts of violence against others (suicide bombers are the obvious exception). These most definitely aren't. These are people who have been held against will, without trial, without charge, without even the chance to talk to the red cross unsupervised. Their deaths are not an act of aggression. They were acts of desperation by men who no longer had control of their fates.
An act of war is a very specific set of actions. Acts of war are done on a nation-state level. I, personally cannot make an act of war. I, as a person, cannot declare war. No person, acting on their own behalf can commit an act of war. A prisoner committing suicide is not an act of war.
Harry Harris really needs to have a long think about the job he does and the things he says. Surely he must know that the rest of the world is not impressed with the existence of Guantanamo Bay. This sort of aggressive bullshit with no empathy with those being held by the guy in charge is not going to improve the way people think about the place. Harry's bosses should seriously think about how he's doing his job (although given who his bosses are, they may not think he has much to answer to).
Sydney Morning Herald
News.com.au
End Post
Writing time: 35 minutes
Time since last post: 1 day
Current media: Geeknights
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
A Smaller God
Story telling has always included gods. And for their parts, gods have always had stories. The Greek, Norse and Celtic all have their stories. The Judeo-Christian god has the Torah, the Bible and the Koran telling his story.
And since gods are such well known and impressive characters, writers have included them in their own stories. Douglas Adams' "The Long Dark Teatime of the Soul" deals with what life is like for the Norse gods in the modern day. Other novels look at similar themes with other gods. Robert Rankin's "Waiting for Goldaming" is about someone investigating the death of God.
One writer who has freely incorporated gods into his stories is Neil Gaiman. "American Gods" is all about gods. In The Sandman, a number of gods from various pantheons are encountered. And this brings me to the actual purpose of this writing. In The Sandman, one particular mythos is singled out as being different. In the Brief Lives arc, Gaiman describes the life cycle of gods. They are born in the dreams of men, move into the waking world, as belief wanes they return to dreams and eventually move onto realms about which the only thing known is that there is no return. It is possible to avoid this fate by ensuring that belief, no matter how little endures. Pharamond achieves this by becoming the embodiment of transportation, something that will never go away. Ishtar, a Babylonian love goddess ekes out a meager existence working at a strip club. The Japanese gods incorporate everything from Marilyn Monroe to astronauts into their pantheon so that there's always something in there being worshipped by people.
The main point though is that people came first and that they formed their gods in their image. Only one mythos is excepted from this rule. And not surprisingly it's the Judeo-Christian mythos. First, it is stated that his home realm, called the Silver City, is explicitly separate from the rest of the universe. This is not just the material universe, but non-material parts as well, such the Dreaming and Hell. This separates it from every other realm in the Sandman universe, such as the realms of Fairie, Asgard, Destiny's Garden and others. The Sandman, during The Wake arc, states that there is a power above the Endless, although does not explicitly name that power or link it to the God of the Silver City.
Second, the Silver City, God and the angels all existed before the rest of creation. The short story Murder Mystery (not a Sandman story, but set in the same universe) is set in this before time, when the angels are helping God in designing his universe, although given how events play out, it is clear that this is just another stage in God's design, and needs to be gone through to ensure that the creation works out right, by making Lucifer into who he is destined to be.
The spin off series Lucifer, while not being written by Gaiman, continues this them of God being the overall creator of everything, and other gods being part of that creation. When God leaves, everything falls apart, including the realms of other gods.
So God is treated differently to other gods. This is not surprising given that he is the divinity of the western worlds dominant religions, while other gods are not held with such reverence by modern readers. Part of it is surely not wanting to antagonise the reader. Few gods in the Sandman are shown as unflawed beings. The gods lie, manipulate, bribe, scheme and more, while God sits above it all, watching his creation.
That was pretty much my point. God gets treated differently to all the other gods. Not the most significant of thoughts, but it is interesting to note that a difference is present, and it is a major difference in the nature of and significance of the being known as God.
End Post
Writing time: 6 hours, 10 minutes (I did leave the house for a few hours to play some chess, take about 4 hours off of that at least in reality)
Time since last post: 5 days
Current media: iTunes party shuffle
And since gods are such well known and impressive characters, writers have included them in their own stories. Douglas Adams' "The Long Dark Teatime of the Soul" deals with what life is like for the Norse gods in the modern day. Other novels look at similar themes with other gods. Robert Rankin's "Waiting for Goldaming" is about someone investigating the death of God.
One writer who has freely incorporated gods into his stories is Neil Gaiman. "American Gods" is all about gods. In The Sandman, a number of gods from various pantheons are encountered. And this brings me to the actual purpose of this writing. In The Sandman, one particular mythos is singled out as being different. In the Brief Lives arc, Gaiman describes the life cycle of gods. They are born in the dreams of men, move into the waking world, as belief wanes they return to dreams and eventually move onto realms about which the only thing known is that there is no return. It is possible to avoid this fate by ensuring that belief, no matter how little endures. Pharamond achieves this by becoming the embodiment of transportation, something that will never go away. Ishtar, a Babylonian love goddess ekes out a meager existence working at a strip club. The Japanese gods incorporate everything from Marilyn Monroe to astronauts into their pantheon so that there's always something in there being worshipped by people.
The main point though is that people came first and that they formed their gods in their image. Only one mythos is excepted from this rule. And not surprisingly it's the Judeo-Christian mythos. First, it is stated that his home realm, called the Silver City, is explicitly separate from the rest of the universe. This is not just the material universe, but non-material parts as well, such the Dreaming and Hell. This separates it from every other realm in the Sandman universe, such as the realms of Fairie, Asgard, Destiny's Garden and others. The Sandman, during The Wake arc, states that there is a power above the Endless, although does not explicitly name that power or link it to the God of the Silver City.
Second, the Silver City, God and the angels all existed before the rest of creation. The short story Murder Mystery (not a Sandman story, but set in the same universe) is set in this before time, when the angels are helping God in designing his universe, although given how events play out, it is clear that this is just another stage in God's design, and needs to be gone through to ensure that the creation works out right, by making Lucifer into who he is destined to be.
The spin off series Lucifer, while not being written by Gaiman, continues this them of God being the overall creator of everything, and other gods being part of that creation. When God leaves, everything falls apart, including the realms of other gods.
So God is treated differently to other gods. This is not surprising given that he is the divinity of the western worlds dominant religions, while other gods are not held with such reverence by modern readers. Part of it is surely not wanting to antagonise the reader. Few gods in the Sandman are shown as unflawed beings. The gods lie, manipulate, bribe, scheme and more, while God sits above it all, watching his creation.
That was pretty much my point. God gets treated differently to all the other gods. Not the most significant of thoughts, but it is interesting to note that a difference is present, and it is a major difference in the nature of and significance of the being known as God.
End Post
Writing time: 6 hours, 10 minutes (I did leave the house for a few hours to play some chess, take about 4 hours off of that at least in reality)
Time since last post: 5 days
Current media: iTunes party shuffle
Thursday, June 08, 2006
The past rears its head
Back when life was simple and I was doing a PhD, one of the things I started was a little user guide for the program I was using to do the calculations. It was mostly just saying what the heck the major input and output files were, and a few example calculations. Some of the information in there was picked up from using the program, but a lot it I picked up by actually talking with the main guy who wrote it and making lots of notes.
Anyway on Monday I got an email from a girl at a university in the US who said she'd found the guide useful and wanted to know if I had any plans to complete it as some areas such as the introduction were just blank spaces. My brief reply just said that I was no longer working with NRLMOL and had no plans to complete it.
I felt a bit bad saying that, as it was a reminder of just another thing I didn't complete with my PhD. On the other hand, it was good to know that it had been helpful to others even in its partial form. I think on the whole it was more good than bad, as I've kind of got used a little to the emotions that get associated with the non-completion of post grad (I use the word emotions because neither guilt nor depression accurately describe it, but do encompass part of it).
End Post
Writing time: 11 minutes
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: The Long Kiss Goodnight
Anyway on Monday I got an email from a girl at a university in the US who said she'd found the guide useful and wanted to know if I had any plans to complete it as some areas such as the introduction were just blank spaces. My brief reply just said that I was no longer working with NRLMOL and had no plans to complete it.
I felt a bit bad saying that, as it was a reminder of just another thing I didn't complete with my PhD. On the other hand, it was good to know that it had been helpful to others even in its partial form. I think on the whole it was more good than bad, as I've kind of got used a little to the emotions that get associated with the non-completion of post grad (I use the word emotions because neither guilt nor depression accurately describe it, but do encompass part of it).
End Post
Writing time: 11 minutes
Time since last post: 2 days
Current media: The Long Kiss Goodnight
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Improved Comms
A fair number of things have popped into my mind since my last post. I think I'll list them in reverse chronological order, as I know there are things I wanted to write about that are slipping my mind, so hopefully when I get to them I'll remember.
I bought a new mobile phone today. Still with the same company on the same sort of plan, just a new piece of hardware. It is also a cheap and clunky model, but it sends and receives phone calls and text messages, which is what I require from a phone. The impetus for me buying a new phone was the fact that my old one had a talk time of 30 seconds when not plugged into the charger, and so was not so much a mobile phone as a expensive home phone.
This morning was spent in a recruitment process. This is for a call center job, with a bit of sales involved, so we'll see how it goes. It involved an interview, some roleplays, some computer tests, some verbal and numerical reasoning and a team exercise. Most of it went ok, the roleplay I got a bit flustered on. The numerical reasoning test was simple, but they design it so that you have to really rush to get it all finished, so I missed the last two of 20 questions.
On a related note, as I left I was chatting with a girl who had also gone through the process, just some idle chit chat, but we split ways at an intersection, and in saying goodbye I didn't pay attention to where I was going and almost walked out in front of some oncoming traffic.
Also, I left my jacket behind, and so had to go and get it. Not sure if that is a winning move or not.
I found a online cartoon a few days ago that seems quite good. The art isn't the greatest, but the humor and maths references make it good. This one particularly resonates with me. Also the URL is quite original.
That seems about all for now.
End Post
Writing time: 28 minutes
Time since last post: 12 days
Current media: Monty Python
I bought a new mobile phone today. Still with the same company on the same sort of plan, just a new piece of hardware. It is also a cheap and clunky model, but it sends and receives phone calls and text messages, which is what I require from a phone. The impetus for me buying a new phone was the fact that my old one had a talk time of 30 seconds when not plugged into the charger, and so was not so much a mobile phone as a expensive home phone.
This morning was spent in a recruitment process. This is for a call center job, with a bit of sales involved, so we'll see how it goes. It involved an interview, some roleplays, some computer tests, some verbal and numerical reasoning and a team exercise. Most of it went ok, the roleplay I got a bit flustered on. The numerical reasoning test was simple, but they design it so that you have to really rush to get it all finished, so I missed the last two of 20 questions.
On a related note, as I left I was chatting with a girl who had also gone through the process, just some idle chit chat, but we split ways at an intersection, and in saying goodbye I didn't pay attention to where I was going and almost walked out in front of some oncoming traffic.
Also, I left my jacket behind, and so had to go and get it. Not sure if that is a winning move or not.
I found a online cartoon a few days ago that seems quite good. The art isn't the greatest, but the humor and maths references make it good. This one particularly resonates with me. Also the URL is quite original.
That seems about all for now.
End Post
Writing time: 28 minutes
Time since last post: 12 days
Current media: Monty Python
Monday, May 29, 2006
Single Purpose Legislation
A rider is a piece of legislation attached as an amendment to another unrelated bill. Usually the rider is something of specific interest to only a limited number of the members of the legislature, and the bill it is attached to is usually something of significant importance that is likely to be approved without much comment or controversy. An example of this is the REAL ID act passed about a year ago by the US Congress as a rider to a military appropriations bill. Riders can be used to as a means of pork barreling, if it the rider can be attached without too much notice.
A rider can also be used to sabotage important legislation. By attaching a rider with provisions that may be abhorrent to others, so that people will vote against the bill to prevent the rider getting through, even though the original bill may have many positive outcomes.
Riders are a problem for legislatures, as they increase the complexity of debate as well as splitting the focus of the legislature. They are bad for the people since representatives trying to get bills through without appropriate consideration are not serving the people they were elected by as well as neglecting the people as a whole.
There is a simple way to minimise the impact of riders. Every bill should have a single purpose that is clearly stated at the beginning of the bill, and all provisions of the bill must act towards that purpose. This still allows amendments that are aimed at improving the bill, but prevents the addition of riders that are unrelated to the bill. This also means that a rider would need it's own bill with its own clearly stated purpose and will get the appropriate debate.
A rider can also be used to sabotage important legislation. By attaching a rider with provisions that may be abhorrent to others, so that people will vote against the bill to prevent the rider getting through, even though the original bill may have many positive outcomes.
Riders are a problem for legislatures, as they increase the complexity of debate as well as splitting the focus of the legislature. They are bad for the people since representatives trying to get bills through without appropriate consideration are not serving the people they were elected by as well as neglecting the people as a whole.
There is a simple way to minimise the impact of riders. Every bill should have a single purpose that is clearly stated at the beginning of the bill, and all provisions of the bill must act towards that purpose. This still allows amendments that are aimed at improving the bill, but prevents the addition of riders that are unrelated to the bill. This also means that a rider would need it's own bill with its own clearly stated purpose and will get the appropriate debate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
