Living The System

The people are a reflection of the system they are in. I was thinking about crime. Take for example the chance that a gang of hooligans decides to assault a lone person. Intuitively, one should be justified in using any means necessary in order to stop the attack and thereby defend oneself. An extension of this self defense is the possibility of justifiable homicide.

I was discussing the matter with some friends, regarding how they would defend themselves in a life threatening situation. Indeed, the ideal solutions would be to avoid the conflict in the first place or perhaps to flee. Yet, sometimes I do wonder whether flight is always the best possible option to aid one's survival. If flight is not an option in a situation, the logical thing to do next is to stand and make a last stand.

Realistically, one cannot possibly expect to defend oneself against a large group of assailants. However, it may be possible to take one down in a sufficiently intimidating way such that it discourages the rest from continuing the assault. One such method is a messy kill. It was pointed out that if I did exercise that option, I would be slapped with a lawsuit even in the unlikely event that I should succeed.

That got me thinking. If the use of deadly force is never justified in self defense, the system weighs fairly soundly in favor of criminals (or assailants). They have already committed a crime by acting as aggressors, yet one cannot respond with deadly force to avoid becoming a victim of aggression. Such a mindset may also explain the reluctance of bystanders to intervene in an assault, not just from the prospect of being harmed, but also from fear of legal repercussions from trying to aid another person. Whether the legal system does indeed rule in this manner seems to be less relevant than the public perception of how such rulings go, with respect to how a responsible citizen would or could respond in these situations. Indeed, the perception of the system is sufficient to shape the behaviors of those living within it.

Love Thyself

I believe one's first priority in life should be to learn to love oneself. I find it curious that loving oneself is often associated with narcissism and is thus generally frowned upon. To me, loving oneself and being narcissistic are two different things. One's about having a healthy self-love so that one does not develop self esteem issues, and the other is about loving oneself to excess such that one becomes incapable of considering others' needs.

In my opinion, one is incapable of truly loving others if one cannot actually love oneself. In fact, those who do not love themselves seem to be the sorts of people who act in a mean manner towards others, or seem to mechanically perform beneficial acts without self-motivated intention. For example, I know of people who have a very other-driven aspirations. When they do things, it's exclusively for the sake of other people. I do not believe it to be a bad thing to wish others well, regardless of the origin of those motivations. However, I find their situation to be precarious, because the actions are done in an effort to seek approval from others so they feel validated in loving themselves. Basically, should that approval disappear for any reason, their self esteem crashes. It is not unlike a junkie seeking a fix.

Then again, self-love is not necessarily something that is easy for everyone. There are various reasons for it, ranging from real personal problems to trouble overcoming social conditioning. I suppose it helps some that I am something of a narcissist and would generally do things primarily for myself, but then again I also have little trouble doing beneficial things for largely altruistic reasons. Regardless, my view of life is to first love oneself, and the other loves will follow. Mostly.

The Writer's Gaze

I was reading the work of a local writer, and basically found the writing style to be clumsy. I tried to identify exactly what was clumsy about the style, which seemed quite common to new local writers.

The style, as I would describe it, is akin to having a fixed writer's gaze. A novel, like a movie, has a gaze. This gaze essentially is the camera in a movie or a perspective in the novel. When the gaze is fixed, the narrative starts feeling stilted. An example of such stilting is the constant act of describing what happens in the story from a fixed perspective. The woman enters the bathroom. It has pink tiles. She turns on the water and soaks in the tub once it is full.

Now, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the description. It does indeed let the reader know what is going on in the scene. However, the perspective taken also creates a sense of distance, with a distinct lack of richness. How does the bathroom smell? What are the sounds? Is there something going on in the immediate area? Undoubtedly, there are times when distance is desirable and can even be used to create suspense. However, when an entire story starts being written with such distance and lack of sensory richness, it gets stale in a hurry.

Losing Their Religion

Sometimes I think that certain churches are losing their Christian direction. Correction, perhaps more than just sometimes. The very religion is full of contradictions, but I think the worst one is when legalism is allowed to supercede grace.

I am talking about the way these churches turn away those perceived to be "sinners". Now, of course, it is a Christian ideal that people avoid sin as far as possible. Yet, it is also recognized that the church is meant to serve as a sanctuary for sinners, since its presence would not even be needed if everyone were truly blameless. Indeed, at that point I'd say everyone was in heaven.

So the problem here is that if certain groups of "sinners" are kept out of the church, would they not become a group of "unsaved" people and made so by the neglect of those who are "less" sinful? Shouldn't the goal of salvation be to let everyone in on the deal, but leave Big G to judge? Truly, I think, there are a goodly number who have lost their direction.

Knowing What You Want

When it comes to game design, it can be quite difficult knowing what one wants especially with regard to balance. I love the mid production phase when a lot of stuff isn't in yet, but it's sufficiently complete that people start believing that they have an idea of just where the balance should go. It's a real awkward situation.

In fact, it can be somewhat bewildering. On one paw it's entirely possible to keep tweaking the balance until everyone is satisfied. However, by doing so, not only is there unnecessary work from the constant tweaking, it also becomes increasingly difficult to keep track of less than legit changes made to achieve balance in the interim state of the game. This is a comparatively small matter on a small project, but the difficulty of maintaining documentation on a large project is very much harder.

Then again, the tweaks can also be viewed as iterations. In general, the higher the number of iterations, the more the balance is refined. By that logic, the balance should be constantly tweaked.

Of course, I did figure a balance point to my balancing approach. Specifically, that the tweaks should be made periodically to address the most significant flaws, while keeping in mind the overall direction of the project. That basically means leaving some flaws out of the fixing cycle such that they serve as a constant reminder of just what is still missing. It is not pleasant, but it serves its purpose.

To Calibrate A Response

Ideal responses and real responses differ, and I think most are quite aware of that. Today, I was pondering the way my colleagues often defer to their superiors. Basically, they cut out certain responses in a bid to somehow not offend their superiors. While I can see how this can be a useful survival technique, I do view such deference as a form of cowardice and not quite an optimal way to deal with superiors.

Now, my view is to treat everyone as equals. That is regardless whether they are the world's most powerful president or the lowliest beggar. Of course, since some beggars can be quite irritating, that does not always hold true. However, I do not permit myself to be intimidated by someone's social status on its own merit. Ultimate, I would treat them as I would any other person, unless I receive a very clear signal to the contrary.

My view is that such an approach is more optimal, because one never knows just how receptive a superior may be to casual but respectful conversation and suggestions. It seems quite pointless to gimp one's own opinions by having the default view of one's view not mattering. If anything, the superior may well be swayed to one's view through other means. In fact, that can circumvent the superiors' right to overrride a view that they feel is contrary to their goals. In brief, I believe a subordinate should never sell themselve short.

To Scent

I think living in an urban environment tends to nudge most of us towards heavy uses of sight and hearing as the primary senses. Touch and taste come next. And the last one that's of major significance seems to be smell, except perhaps when it comes to food.

One thing that's been fascinating me lately is how people smell different. I'm not talking about the obvious scents like nasty body odors or heavy perfumes, but the general biological and acquired scents of each person. Some females smell particularly musky, and somewhat different during the different times of month. Others are mostly scentless except for the lingering aroma of the shampoo/skin cream/sunblock. One of my male colleagues smells faintly of beef and something of dog, and yet another male colleague smells something of goat and something vaguely metallic.

Consciously recognizing each aromatic signature is key to knowing who's standing behind me, along with the other signs like the general height and mass from the floor's vibrations. Besides the identifying factor, it's just interesting to pay attention to the less used senses for a change. I guess that is how animals with stronger senses of smell become able to readily distinguish between people. Being able to mentally mark out the individual constituents of each scent goes a long way towards identifying unique aromatic signatures.

Representation

Sensationalism and plain social bias are key factors in ensuring that homosexual people remain sidelined. As we say in media writing class, a dog biting a man is generally not news, while a man biting a dog will make it to the papers. Now, whenever a paedophile becomes involved with a young kid, it is invariably something that makes the papers. In fact, it would be wrong not to reveal the presence of such unacceptable behavior. There is no intrinsic moral wrong in doing so.

However, since such crimes are newsworthy, and the achievements of homosexual individuals are hardly so, I imagine the popular representation of homosexual individuals would be quite negative in the press relative to their positive representations. Again, this is not intrinsically morally wrong. It's just media writing and deciding what is nesworthy.

Basically, given that homosexuals are a minority (and all that entails), and are simultaneously under attack by certain groups of people, it stands to reason that these negative representations are simply used as a means by which to condemn them. Undoubtedly, such acts are quite unfortunate and understandably revilved by the community. Worse still, decent gay folk are rendered quite invisible.

Overall, the popular perception is difficult to reverse. The media's other duty is to inform the public, and I believe they are right to reveal the unsavory acts of the black sheep. However, what can be done to help the situation is to give some indication that the crimes, while undoubtedly heinous, are not the norm. Certainly, priests may abuse altar boys, yet I seriously doubt a majority of priests do such things at all, let alone on a regular basis. Should there be an attempt to make peace between the factions (impossible though that may seem at this point), it may be possible to persuade both sides to self police and somewhat improve this sordid situation.

Survival Of The Sickest

I've been reading this fascinating book on genetic "diseases" and evolution. Granted, I have not finished it at the time of the writing of this entry. However, I do like what I've read so far, and I believe that while it does overlap the subject matter of Parasite Rex somewhat, it does have more of a focus on genetics and that topic has always interested me.

The book is easy reading, and does alert me to just how limited my senior high school biology education has been. (And I thought that was pretty hefty by itself). Basically, what I learned from my classes was that evolution was, at best, introduced to new genes through the vagaries of random mutation on a rather minute scale. Perhaps some of it could be from gene exchanges through sexual reproduction. Yet, my education failed to at least hint at the possibility of genes switching position outside the context of sexual reproduction, that they could be switched on and off prior to fertilization such that the on and off state could possibly be passed on to the offspring.

I've always suspected that evolution was more active than I've been taught in school, primarily because the adaptations that parasites come up with seem to be suspiciously pertinent to their needs. After all, if it were always a case of a random 1 in a million parasites coming up with the fix, then repopulating to that million, it seems quite improbable that such elegantly adapted samples could just pop into existence even after a million iterations. Improbable, but not impossible, of course.

Of course, I'd imagine that should this subject matter be taught as well, my senior high syllabus would have been even more horrendous. Regardless, I've been introduced by this book to the adaptive benefits of certain congenital conditions that we popularly regard as genetic defects. It also sheds light on my own condition, and how G6PD deficiency could possibly be a good thing. Perhaps I should take care to avoid certain foods that I wasn't previously told to avoid. Hmm. Besides that, I'm also glad that I have not actually donated blood at some point, and risked dosing someone with my epic exploding red blood cells.

Fashion: Self Policing

Fashion is a pretty potent way to send a social message on a daily basis. The way one dresses sends a signal to others regarding the disposition of a person. It also serves as a check of social conformity. This is of course not a problem in a society that respects ones' right to individuality (within reason). Yet, it is a huge penalty in a society where conformity is important.

For example, someone dressing in a manner contrary to the climate and popular culture will most certainly draw attention. In fact, curious bystanders are likely to snap pictures of the person and spread them over the internet. That aside, in a conformist environment like high school, someone not conforming to whatever expectation the gen pop has of them is very likely to face some rather unpleasant social reprisal. I am talking about bullying.

Simply put, fashion is a sort of social confmity test. If one fails that test, there are consequences. A strong-willed individual may go fuck all regarding this, and do as they wish regardless other peoples' reactions. In reality, that is not always the case, and someone winds up victimized as a result. Undoubtedly, this self-policing is potent, and very real.

An Interesting Question

When I was heading home after a drinking session at a bar, we met this rather interesting transvestite (in full drag, no less). He/she turned to me with rather obvious bewilderment on his/her face and asked me: Are you a man or a woman? I suppose the irony of the question was lost on him/her. I simply responded by saying: That is a very interesting question. My friends were quite creeped out by the experience, especially since that wasn't quite a convincing drag getup, and with a rather interestingly masculine voice. I think I have served my stint as mysterious night creature this time round.

What is interesting though, is how such a person who indeed does seem quite willing to transgress gender boundaries by going about in drag at night yet turns out to be so concerned about the formal delineations of my gender. If anything, I'd have thought this person would have set them aside at least for the crossdressing stint.

That is not to say that I have not asked myself that question before. So far, my response has been...does it really matter? Sometimes, after much thought, my conclusion is that...it doesn't really. Androgyny for the win!

Those Senile Delinquents

I am becoming increasingly annoyed by the rising incidences of senile delinquency. Now, the situation is that some old folks are starting to believe that they have some kind of entitlement to a seat on public transport simply by virtue of the fact that they're old. While I do agree that we all have a duty to protect those weaker than we are, there is a difference between being willing/unwilling to do one's duty, and to have someone arrogantly presume that you need to do your duty for them simply because they expect as much.

Now, what happens when an older person is standing before you on public transport? One's duty would come to the fore if the older person (or any other person, for that matter) shows that they are in greater need of the seat than you are. That, or they can voice it out if they show no external signs of weakness but need the seat regardless. Yet, it irks me to no end if someone simply stands in front of another, expecting that their mere presence would coerce the person into giving up their seat. No cookie, my good chap. The standing around and looking imposing bit is largely my role, thank you very much.

I believe that everyone should do their utmost to be civil in all their public dealings as far as possible. In the event that someone chooses to be uncivil in the manner of standing around expecting things to happen, then expressing displeasure when nothing happens because of their silence, I would put them in their place. Being older folk, I have even greater expectations of them, because they have been around longer than I have and I do expect them to have a greater understanding of what constitutes politeness. I do wish, however, that senile delinquents quit behaving like they do and thus giving other older folk a bad name. Unfortunately, I am pretty sure it's wishful thinking at best on my part.

Peeling The Dream

I am documenting my method for peeling aside the layers of my dreams in order to better understand them. I do tend to amuse myself by doing exactly that, whereby when I wake up remembering a dream, I get down to dissecting its contents as I remembered them. Of course, it is expected that some details fade from memory practically immediately, and the memory continues to decay, so it is useful to analyze the dream at the moment of recollection.

The thing I would do is recall as much of the dream as possible, then try to pay attention to each dream segment. From there on, I try to sift out which memory maps to each dream segment. For example, if I dream about a house with a river and a mountain nearby, the interior of the house can often be mapped to an interior I've seen in a movie, read about or just simply seen in real life. What comes next can be distilled further, like how the water is moving and what sort of emotion/experience it is reminiscent of. The process repeats itself till I become unable to reconcile the final dream segments. That's what I regard as somewhat original segments, in that they do not readily relate to a memory or previous dream.

Of course, this is not to say that the "original" segments (which probably are not) are of any particular significance. Except perhaps my rat dream and the other similar ones. Regardless, it is interesting to go through this exercise and realize just how much of a dream is really quite intrinsic however bizarre it may seem to be.

Brainwashing

Sometimes I think the term "brainwashing" is a subjective judgment of highly effective persuasion. Simply put, if someone's personality and opinions have been changed in what is deemed to be a positive manner, that someone has been persuaded. If the change is in a perceived negative direction, that person has been brainwashed.

That bewilders me, because I am trying to better understand just what brainwashing is, and how to differentiate it from plain persuasion. The loose way the term is bandied about does make me think that the terms brainwashing and persuasion are interchangeable depending on the arbitrary perspectives of the people deciding the label. For example, if someone suddenly decided to join an unpopular cult and started becoming exceedingly devoted to the cult, brainwashing is suspected because the person was not expected to originally be of the temperament that would nudge them towards cult membership. And given that the cult may be deemed detrimental to them, their devotion to it may be seen as yet another sign of brainwashing.

However, I've always wondered if they were indeed "brainwashed" as the term is understood. It may well be that the person genuinely believes in this cult for whatever reason. In fact, the term "genuinely" is dubious as well, since it may well be that the brainwashed individual and the persuaded individual both truly believe that they are devoted to the cult. How will one distinguish at this point? My current take is that perhaps the terms are differentiated by perceived acceptability of the persuasion, rather than any objective measure of brainwashingness. After all, I haven't heard of people being brainwashed into being perfectly good law abiding citizens. They were...persuaded.

Sharing The Blame

I was considering the case of gang rape turned aggravated outrage of modesty. Here, a bunch of guys gang raped a girl at a drinking party, but the judge later amended the charge to outrage of modesty. Granted, I do not know the exact facts of the case, so I cannot possibly make a fair alternative judgment, but I do think there is an underlying principle to such cases: sharing the blame.

Now, it seems that the girl has engaged in risky behavior, having gone to a drinking party as the only girl amongst a bunch of guys. Indeed, when people are drunk, they are capable of doing incredibly stupid things, so they are to some extent absolved of being expected to exercise their better judgment. Thus, she is certainly doing something foolish by putting herself at risk.

Yet, there is the niggling doubt here, that justice was not served. The principle is simple, in that a crime is a crime regardless of one's state of mind at the time, and regardless of the risk the victim exposed themselves to. If a man covered in jewelery was silly enough to walk into a lonely dark alley alone, I could reasonably expect that he'd be a target of an opportunistic robber. However, should the robber be caught, I seriously doubt that the robber would be charged with a lesser crime: the robber clearly robbed the man, and would be punished as such. The fact that the man was stupid enough to expose himself to crime is irrelevant in this case. In fact, the man's stupidity was already punished by his being turned into a victim of a crime of opportunity.

Back to the raped girl, my take is that if all involved were drunk and the guys were still sober enough to drag her out to be gang raped for a couple hours, they are certainly sober enough to have a niggling notion of right and wrong. While their state of intoxication can shed doubt on whether consent was given at the time, the fact that they did force themselves on a girl seems to be sufficient grounds to consider the crime a gang rape.

Of course, this assumes that a crime did take place. There is the flip side whereby it could have been that the girl did indeed consent to sex with all of them while she was drunk (or sober) instead of with one of them as claimed. In short, she could have cried rape. Conversely, the guys could simply gang up and claim that she was consenting at the time. It becomes a somewhat tricky call, because all were presumably drunk at the time, while their truthfulness and integrity of memory may be in doubt due to intoxication. Circumstantial evidence may serve to be the objective witness here, though the trustworthiness of the evidence is only as good as its interpretation.

Ultimately, however, I disagree that women should by default avoid such "risky behavior" to evade potential harm. Responsibility for one's actions should fall equally upon everyone. If the girl in question was at risk of being raped, it is the responsibility of those guys nearby to prevent their peers from doing so. To assume otherwise, that the woman is responsible for avoiding harm, is a slippery slope. How far should one go to truly avoid harm? She might as well hide at home wearing a full suit of armor and a chastity belt. Surely such a solution is unsuitable. As I've said before: if men were truly unable to control themselves, they should not be permitted to go out unescorted by a sensible woman. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.

I discussed the case with a friend, and after much discussion of avoiding harm when drinking, we found that there was no real way to avoid harm when drinking and have fun at the same time. If the girl drank alone with guys at someone's house, the girl is understandably at risk. If the girl drank with female friends at a pub, it is still not inconceivable that the lot of them would get stone drunk and carted off somewhere by a gang to be taken advantage of. If they drank with a mix of both genders, it is still possible that the guy friends proceeded to take advantage. The possibility, then, was to not get stone drunk in the first place. Yet, such an approach is still not suitable, since it is a fine line between being drunk and being amnesiac-drunk: One may not know when one will cross the line, depending on health status, drug use, food consumption, etc. The metabolism varies. The final solution is to simply ban alcohol (and other similar substances) to avoid becoming intoxicated at all.

Ultimately, it must be accepted that some risk is always involved when one is going to get intoxicated for recreational purposes. The risk is not the problem. The problem is societal attitudes that someone is disproportionately responsible for their own safety. In a case where everyone is equally responsible, the victim already bore the responsibility from becoming a victim in the first place. What is left is for the perpetrator to pay their dues.

My Poor Shades

I got myself a new pair of sunglasses a couple weeks back. I was rather pleased with them until I realized that the lenses both had a distortion in the material, causing the image to be blurry towards the bottom of the lenses. Naturally, I brought the pair to the store and the storekeep tried to replace the lenses. Unfortunately, the new lenses turned out to be darker on one side than the other, and the store had no more spares, so back to the supplier it went.

I got the pair back and it seemed like the tinting was even while the image distortion was negligible. Lovely...till I realized that more light was coming out the bottom of the left lens relative to the right. I thought I had them on crooked, so I kept adjusting them without success. After examining the lenses, I realized that one was on crooked. It seems that the lens was marginally oversized for the frame. After another replacement at the store, it seems like the new batch has the exact same subtly oversized lenses. Back to the supplier it went.

I figure the fellas at the store have me tagged for a fussy customer already, but it is really quite unusual that standard issue stuff (mine were not prescription optics) could have such production variance. Given that they were made in France, I shall be a bigot and declare that French engineering leaves much to be desired =p

On Madness

I was considering the Catch-22 situation, and really do think it is an interesting paradox: can a madman truly know that he is mad? The original postulate was one of absolutes, whereby a madman has to be absolutely ignorant of his own madness. However, it is interesting to consider the hypothetical situation whereby this is not the case.

For example, a madman may be aware of his own madness, but be unable to refrain from mad behavior. I recall with amusement the case of Fulgrim whereby he had the misfortune of realizing the madness of his ways after the death of his brother, just before the Slaaneshi daemon fully possessed him while allowing a fragment of his consciousness to gawk in horror at the daemon's actions.

A person thus afflicted cannot be reasonably held accountable for the involuntary actions of the body, yet in a world where people are largely expected to be in control of themselves, I do wonder how such a person would be judged. Guilty, I suppose.

Human Optimization

I was having a discussion and the issue of assholes came up. That is, humans deciding to abuse their privileges, be it authority or access, in order to have personal gain or satisfaction. My friend proposed that nobody was truly an asshole by nature, but is encouraged by the system (or circumstances) to exhibit asshole conduct.

I found the idea intriguing, because indeed abuse is only possible should an affordance exist. For example, I am unlikely to wrongfully arrest someone if I am not invested with the authoritative powers of a police officer. However, there is little question about the desirability of asshole conduct: to those who know right from wrong in a context, the decision tends towards whatever they might deem to be right at the moment. The assumption here is that asshole conduct is not done in a vaccuum out of purely malicious intent.

It occurred to me, however, that asshole conduct is actually a form of situational optimization. That is, if an affordance for personal gain is made available, it is in fact sub-optimal to pursue the "right" path. Take for example white collar criminals. While they are wrongdoers in the eyes of the law, they are also self-optimizing individuals because they spotted a flaw in their respective systems and wilfully exploited them.

Interestingly, the implication is that the morals we are ingrained with are measures of artificial de-optimization to inhibit the maximal exploitation of available opportunities. In a less than optimal enforcement environment, it is actually more desirable to inhibit self-optimizing behavior lest the whole system descend into chaos.

Inception

Let me be upfront: I loved Inception. In fact, I loved it so much that I watched it twice: the first being back in Kentucky. I suppose I would describe the movie as a cross between The Matrix and Mission Impossible. What happens when you try to fiddle with someone's memories, without them knowing? That is basically the crux of the movie.

Now, I can relate in a way, having had dreams of waking up where I realized that I really haven't. It's quite a bizarre experience. However, the concept of precisely navigating dreams within dreams in a perfectly synchronized manner in order to plant an idea in someone's head is quite a challenge. Of course, it does raise the obvious question of what, exactly, reality is. Weaving a tangled web of reality and non-reality, it really does force the viewer to think about what just happened and just where reality lies. The cliff hanger ending does reinforce that, as well.

It has been some time when a movie's encouraged me to think in the sense of I wana know what it is really about rather than trying to imagine connections in an incoherent story. I'd give the movie a straight 8.5/10.

A Quirk Of Memory

I seem to be having some cognitive issues lately, primarily in terms of visual recognition and short term memory retention. I can start a task, get distracted, leave it incomplete for hours (while convinced that I probably did finish it), then realize that I didn't remember finishing it off. Other times, I can read something, and comprehend it entirely wrongly. For example I could read numbers and not remember some of them or reverse their order, read letters entirely wrongly and similar misunderstandings.

What is interesting is that there is nothing wrong with my visual acuity. If anything, it's generally above average in anything but bright lighting conditions. However, just because I can see something doesn't necessarily mean my brain would process it as exactly what I see. I comprehend by reading inside my mind, and what comes out is what I understand as the message. Unfortunately, it seems that I have developed a propensity towards scrambling that message. Or dropping the signal entirely.

3 possibilities: I'm getting senile, developing ADHD, or am just plain sleep deprived from the punishing daytime schedule. For the sake of what little remains of my sanity and the general feeling of being totally messed up from having to be up through the daylight hours, my bet would be sleep deprivation. Note to self: It may be better to make sure parents don't shake me out of bed on weekends.

The Worth Of Love

How much is love worth? It is a question that was raised while I was stuck at Narita. Of course, measuring the exact value of love is a fool's errand, since humans value loved ones differently and prices will vary according to an individual's shifting moods. However, it is sufficient to know that there is indeed no true cap to the price of love, given the correct stimuli.

The situation in question is when a dearly beloved person becomes progressively incapacitated, towards death. Initially, expenses are justified in restoring the person to health. As the incapacitation worsens and greater resources are demanded, the real price of love becomes increasingly apparent. Given the resources available to an average person, expenses may well eat through all savings and might even force one to mortgage the primary dwelling in order to keep the loved one around. The question, of course, is whether it is worthwhile to do so.

Such a consideration is never easily resolved in real life. Human affection may be such that the price of love is effectively infinite, and every additional expense is just another last ditch attempt at saving a life. However, in the hypothetical situation whereby the situation is known to be hopeless, I do wonder if the human in question would actually stop treatment at a particular point and actually let go.

Heading Home

I managed to head down to Naritasan temple early today after a hearty breakfast at the hotel (with meat and fruit again!). The place was just gorgeous. I was also amused to note that I was walking on hallowed ground that was hallowed since 940 AD. That's some old territory. I also walked back via the Omotesando road, which was pretty much a shopping street in the old Japanese style. Pretty much exactly the kind of thing you'd expect to see in anime. Overall, I'd really love to visit these sorts of places rather than some old shopping district in Tokyo. If you're brought up in the city, every other city is kinda the same if not for the subtle differences and obviously the different kinds of architecture/shopping.

After the good long trip home, I finally hit the airport at nearly midnight. Lovely timing. Since I am pretty much able to sleep virtually anywhere, I actually did manage to have a good rest on the plane. My mom figured that I looked pinker from the experience. I am unsure whether I can attribute that to the meat or the brutal sunshine. Of course, the main thing after a trip is the usual unpacking, and then the preparation of the massive number of photos taken...

A Detour

Headin home. I flew down to Houston and was enroute to Japan when there was a medical emergency on board. The flight had to detour to Alaska (yay I've finally "visited" Alaska!). By the time we got to Japan, we already missed the connecting flight. Fortunately, Continental did a bang up job, having tickets to a replacement flight the moment we landed, complete with hotel stay and meal tickets.

I transferred to my hotel in Japan, both somewhat disturbed by the disruption, but also intrigued by the new opportunity to explore the city before my flight the following evening. The buffet dinner at the hotel was really good, especially considering the free flow of roast beef. Come to think of it, I really did get to have a lot of beef on this trip, with the hearty servings of beef stew when I was at the restaurant and at another eatery with my friend. I figure I probably would've gained some weight by the end of the trip. Anyway, early to bed, then early to rise for my visit to a Japanese temple tomorrow.

Moar Flea Market

Last day in Kentucky (I fly tomorrow morning), so I basically headed down to Frankfort Avenue for my trinket shopping. Unfortunately it turns out that a good half of the stores are closed on Sunday, so I did not get to view some of them. Regardless, I managed to have a look at a pawn shop and two trinket (vintage) stores. Crazy Daisy's Antique Mall was fantastic, as was the other place I visited along with Phil's Pawn Shop. From these places, I managed to get a bunch of rings. The other trinkets weren't quite as nice. One of them was a 10k gold ring, with a blood red stone that is probably garnet. Probably my favourite acquisition of the trip, after my photos.

Heading back to downtown, I asked my friend out again and we managed to hit the museum, hang out at the skate park and then catch a movie. We took photos together in the evening, and really...that's about it for Louisville. I'm gona miss the place and the nice people. Of course, seeing as how there was a not-so-nice person right at the end of the day, I'm sure it isn't exactly a city made entirely of smiles.

Flea Market, Gun Show

Today I met up with my conference friend and we headed down to the flea market at the Kentucky Expo Center. It had an incredible range of vintage items, beef jerky (YAY!) and that's when I realized just how cheap gum could be at the flea market. Yes it's new (non-expired) gum, that costs 1/6 of what I paid downtown. Talk about feeling cheated. Anyhoo, I did manage to grab myself some beef jerky to take home, and that really made my day. In thanks for the trip, I bought my friend a knife that he really wanted to have.

After the flea market, we went over to the gun show that was on right next door. Basically, we got to molest a whole range of awesome firearms and various combat knives. Having seen the price and heft of a .50 cal round, I really do feel sad seeing people firing off that M2 Browning. Overall, it was totally worth the entrance fee.

Evening was basically having a huge pizza at a wonderful pizza place, and as usual there was stuff to take home. That was possibly the best pizza I've tasted...like ever. There was as much cheese on top as I usually put on my ghetto pizza, and every bit as much meat as well. These people really know how to make pizza.

Last Conference Day

I presented my second conference paper today and I am reasonably pleased with the outcome. It is always nice to have an award. Anyway, after the conference, I was wondering where I should go in town and probably ride the Belle of Louisville when I learned that another professor was quite inclined to visit the tank museum at Fort Knox. Between the novel experience of riding on a real honest to goodness steamship and visiting a museum full of old military hardware, hell I would go for the museum any day of the week. Every ship largely feels like every other, as long as it isn't a speedboat or catamaran.

Anyway, the museum was smashing and had what was basically entire halls full of military hardware. Even though we had to hire a driver at quite some expense in order to get there and back, it was really a unique experience. It was in fact made even more unique because the museum itself was moving away from Fort Knox. Basically, that made us one of the last few visitors to the place.

The rest of the evening was largely uneventful. It was getting late, I was quite tired and overall there really wasn't a lot we could do anyway. Just a walk around the waterfront one more time, and then off to bed.

Around the town

Today was a fantastic day. I had my breakfast at the hotel, then managed to head down to the Old Town of Louisville. Just the ticket, considering that I am a big fan of these old places. I took the trolley down and marched about in blazing sunshine. Frankly, summer sun sucks, especially when it's approaching midday. Bitching about Sol aside, I nearly wanted to pull out when I started seeing the old buildings.

It really is quite amazing to see the old French-inspired architecture, amongst other buildings from the Victorian era. I even managed to hit the Conrad-Cladwell house, which was quite the quintessential richly decorated Victorian mansion. Overall, it was quite the tour of the town and its historic buildings. Unfortunately, I did not go for the ghost walk at night because I found out online that the ghost walk was really effectively a walking tour without actually going into the "haunted" houses. A pity, really.

Anyway, I headed back after that and had a good walk down the waterfront. It really is amazing when the sun's down at 9pm, because that means the sunset (and sunrise) is effectively a whole hour. Plenty of time for some serious shooting.

Conference Days

These two days were effectively conference days, with all that entails. I presented my first paper, and the reception seemed generally positive at the point. On the first day I went out with this really nice fella from the conference who gave me a spin in his Mustang, and we got to visit the historic Bardstown road area. Again, it was quite the place and the food was superb. It's a shame that most stores closed real early, so I was unable to do a lot of shopping.

On the second day, my post-conference time was mostly taken up by the conference dinner, so it was a lot of food and rubbing shoulders with minimal sightseeing. Regardless, it was nice to have a little walk around downtown area after sundown even though it was lightly drizzling at the time. I did hear that the area was prone to street crime, so I did avoid going too far by myself given that I was carrying some serious camera gear. Ah, well.

To Downtown

Morning at Louisville. I learned that the nearest (and most iconic) attraction nearby was Churchill Downs, a.k.a. *The* Kentucky derby racetrack. If Kentucky's known for its horsies, then CD is the place where it's all at. In theory anyway. It was a right fine place, and a good photographic warmup even though I was never really all that fond of the derby. I did learn some little things about the gig in general, and really it was quite the fun experience.

Of course, this was also my first taste of summer sunshine and I dare say it was singularly horrific. I set out early at 7am, figuring that I'd be back before things really got scorching out there. That's the theory anyway. It turns out that after walking to the derby track, mooching about the museum and all that, I was really heading back at around 11am, which was pretty much as good as high noon. Note to self: walking around at high noon is a painful experience and should be avoided as much as possible.

After checking into my hotel, the next thing was to figure out where everything was downtown, and plan my movements for the next day. I felt real fortunate to have a free city trolley service that could take me across town in air conditioned comfort. That was a real life saver and would prove to be most useful in the coming days. I hit a thrift store just as it was closing, and then basically wandered about getting my bearings with the aid of a map.

At Louisville

It was a really long plane ride, with a bunch of transits. Basically, here I am at my hotel after a free shuttle ride from the airport. One thing good about being me is that I can basically sleep in most places, including on planes. So far, it seems like I have little trouble with the time zone shift.

Unfortunately, as it's really close to midnight, there's little opportunity to explore the area except those immediately close to my hotel. Perhaps I would have an opportunity in the morning. All I can say is that the room's positively enormous given that I chose the smallest they had available...it'd probably fit 4 people comfortably. Regardless, I'd go get about the next day.

Off To Kentucky

This begins my log of my trip to Louisville, Kentucky for a conference. At this point, my key concern is not so much about the nitty gritties of presenting papers before an academic audience as it is about how I am to go about to the city proper and moving between hotels. It would be my first time navigating a new city a goodly distance away from home, and it is indeed quite a novel experience. The other noteworthy concern is how I'd deal with an exceptionally long plane flight.

Overall, however, I am pretty excited about the prospect of going so far, especially considering that the travel and hotel expenses have been covered. I have brought my laptop and main camera, along with my sidearm, so I should be pretty well equipped for an extended photographic jaunt.

Unfulfilled

It is a strange feeling, how unfulfilled I can be at times. I had another pang of it just now while heading home from my walk. I suppose what hurts is that everything is starting to feel routine. There are few truly new experiences, and I guess the best description for what I am feeling now is empty. Truly, I have achieved some things, and I guess life in general is going pretty well, but something's still missing. I can't really put a finger on it, though.

I guess I got a hint of what did get my blood pumping during martial arts class. It was a good feeling. The thrill of the hunt, as I put it, though that still felt somewhat unsatisfying. Perhaps I had simply not sated my bloodlust for too long. Well, whatever it is, the fact remains that I still feel somewhat empty inside, and there's a tingling urge for me to do something about it.

I went out today to get a feel of the camera in my hands again. I've not walked my gear for some time, and my trigger finger was itching. I am always conflicted whenever it comes to taking my camera for a walk. On one paw I am never thrilled to go out while the sun is blazing. On the other, that's probably the best time to grab shots given the excellent lighting. Ah, well.

The Value Of Life

There was this question I asked myself regarding the exchange rate between pleasure and life: would I swallow a pill that would make me feel good permanently, but has a 10% chance of killing me outright? In terms of odds, I'd say it looks like a pretty good deal. 100% chance of a significant benefit, vs 10% chance of total wipeout. On that evaluation alone, I'd say yeah of course! But then again, things are never that simple when evaluating a deal. My marginal utility of the option is quite low, considering that I wouldn't really be feeling all that much better since I'm not all that messed up in general.

This hypothetical situation is an abstraction of how addictions happen. In general, addictions will have some sort of wipeout-style drawback. Gambling addiction may result in financial ruin. Drug addictions may wind up with a fatal OD sometime. Yet, the good feelings gained from the addictions are what make them addictive (in addition to their own inherent addictiveness like in the case of drugs). If one is truly feeling mighty messed up, the exchange rate between pleasure and life becomes pretty low. It is a lot easier to shoot up some good feelings today and fuck tomorrow, than it is to endure another "safe" but otherwise awful day. Simply put, their marginal benefit from the experience is way higher than my own.

That is not to say that I do not have my own addictions. It simply is that mine are, while possibly harmful, generally not expected to have some truly lethal wipeout scenario. The black swan will show up when it does, but I can reasonably expect to survive that experience when it does.

Toy Story 3

First thought: just what was I expecting? It's Toy Story, after all. Anyway, this is the time when Andy grows up and the toys have to find a new home. The attic, someone's childcare center, someone else's home, the dumpster...you get the idea. Them old toys gota go somewhere.

Unfortunately, I think the story lost a lot of its drama when it was made known early on that Andy did not intend to throw the toys away. It would have done a lot better if the toys had a true story of woe, only to learn later that they were not junk. But then again, that's my personal bent.

Now, the premise is similar...toys go on an adventure, everything resets in the end. Only this time they have a new owner, since Andy's now off to college. I guess this is something I cannot really relate to, since I never really had those sorts of toys when I was a kid, and I certainly never imagined that my toys were anything else but toys.

While most other people can and do appreciate this particular installment of the series, all I can give this one would be 7.5/10. Primarily due to the touching scenes that dot the story. I still prefer How To Train Your Dragon.

Faces Of Slavery

Slavery does not just disappear. It simply reappears in different forms. There is always a demand for labor one way or another. And of course, the cheaper the labor is in whatever terms matter, the better. That simply means there will be more labor available to help get work done, thus freeing up resources for other applications.

The modern day equivalent of slavery (apart from slavery itself) would be outsourcing of production to poor countries, whereby foreign labor is paid pathetically small sums in order to produce goods for their richer employers. Some may argue that it is a fair business transaction that is agreed upon by both sides, and that the employees receive enough money to be reasonably well off considering the cost of living of their countries. That sort of logic is also applied to slaves of old, whereby they are "privileged" to be treated well...or rather...simply not being abused.

Simply put, compensation for outsourced labor can never be fair. If it is fair, as defined by the market rate for labor in the original country, there would actually be a disincentive for companies to outsource. Outsourcing as a cost cutting measure necessitates that costs be lowered and this is achieved by under-compensating labor. Indeed, this does not sound like the traditional definition of slavery, which in modern times is common amongst trafficked humans. That is, people forced to work and often for no pay. Yet, the modern face of wage slavery cannot be ignored, considering how people from poor countries are basically paid an artificially low wage simply because their would-be employers would not pay more and they can do little better locally anyway.

Memento Mori

I had a rather interesting discussion with a friend yesterday regarding the important distinction between having no fear of death, and enjoying the active pursuit of death. A challenge I often encounter when claiming that I do not fear death, is that I should perhaps go kill myself right away, since I do not fear death and thus should be courageous enough to do so. Frankly, if I responded to that claim every time I encountered it, I would be dead many times over.

Since I am typing this, I am of this moment quite un-dead. I probably would remain so for some time, bar unforeseen circumstances, given the particular quirk of my bloodline. Regardless, I think it is important to distinguish between pursuing death and having no fear of it. For example, I may not fear the average passer-by, but it would be silly of me to "prove" that lack of fear by punching random people in the face. There really is nothing to prove here. In the case of pursuing death, I believe hypocrisy is readily proven by the simple fact that self-claimed pursuers of death are generally still alive when they speak of it, thus invalidating their claim. 'nuff said. On the flip side, however, I also believe that living life in the active evasion of death is equally foolhardy: one stops living for oneself and does so more for the sake of survival itself. Neither seems to me like a good way to live.

I believe memento mori is a pertinent philosophical guide here. One should learn to accept one's mortality. Life will end...sooner or later. Knowing so and accepting it frees oneself from the extremes of pursuing and avoiding death. Che sera sera and all that. That is when one can finally begin to truly appreciate life for what it is. To this I have received challenges before, that I should prove my lack of fear by proceeding to off myself. And to those challenges I say bollocks. If one needs to prove such a thing in the here and now, one is simply willing to go ahead while one still has the guts for it. I'd say the proof is in the pudding: I can find that out for myself in that undefined future when time finally catches up with me.

Terrible Service

Today, I experienced the worst of all bad service so far. I was eating at a cafe with company, and the place was fairly crowded. After a reasonable wait, part of our order was delivered. Given the crowd, it was to be expected that the other part would take awhile. Of course, this is where the problems began.

We ordered a pair of pizzas, and only one arrived. The waiter said that the second one would come soon. It occurs to us that no plates, paper napkins or utensils were brought out. We ask for water. Fifteen minutes pass. We ask the waiter, and are assured that the pizza would come. Still no cutlery, and no water either. I had to chase them for the napkins and cutlery. Half an hour passes. Still no pizza. The water had to be collected personally even though it should've been served. The kitchen has been instructed to prepare one as a priority order. Three quarters of an hour. The waiter indicates that the order has been passed down, but the kitchen isn't bringing it out. Food continues to flow out to other tables. An hour passes. Waiter asks whether we wish to cancel the pizza order. What. The. Hell.

I think I do not need to describe exactly what went wrong here. The situation is quite self explanatory. Perhaps I should have declined when they turned out to be really sloppy with the reservation procedure. First I tried calling them. They said the reservations were only taken online. Fair enough. I made a reservation online a few days in advance, and was told that the place was full out. Wow that's pretty hot. I got a call yesterday saying that one reservation was withdrawn, so I was happy to be slotted in. I requested that they send a confirmation email just in case. They did not. I sent an email reminder, figuring that they were bus and forgot. Still no response. On hindsight, I figure that if they could not be bothered to respond promptly to their sole means of securing reservations, I shouldn't have expected them to provide good service. There goes a potentially good evening.

Back To Training

It's time to get back to physical training. After doing 3 months of rather sedentary work, I can really feel things going south with my overall fitness level. Hell, even if it my fitness wasn't going south too quickly, I'd think it's generally a bad thing to let it go south in the first place. Besides, I'm probably getting fat as well, now that I prod at my tummy.

For the record, it's lightweight stuff, with my trusty old dumbbells and grip bars. High reps, low load. That kind of thing. Even a bit of training is better than nothing, methinks.

The next step would be to get back to working the abs and my lower back. Keeping those in tone would probably do wonders for my posture, which at this point is admittedly not good at all. Something needs to be done about that for sure. Now that I just did my first session in quite a while, I do find myself feeling pretty darned good. Things can only get better from here.

Heritage Sites

I've been mulling over the whole world heritage site concept, and really...while admirable as an anchor to counterbalance the inexorable march of progress, I wonder just how sustainable such a concept can be. For example, site A is preserved because it is worthy of conservation. Eventually B, C, D and so on get selected. It stands to reason that increasing tracts of land will be frozen from redevelopment in order to preserve the integrity of the sites.

The question, then, is whether there will come a point where heritage sites take up such a significant proportion of valuable landmass that their heritage status will have to be revoked. It seems to be the case, seeing as how heritage sites that were manmade tend to be on plots of land that are in some way useful to humans. It therefore stands to reason that some people will invariably desire it for their use at some point.

Of course, the flip side is the sustainability of cultural and natural heritage. If things of natural beauty and human cultural heritage were to be swept away in the tide of progress, how then will there be anything left for the descendants? This is one balance I am glad I do not have to administer, because I do not have the answer to it at this point.

Office Politics

Office politics are always interesting. I learned today that someone was being quite the asshole, playing the CC game at work. That works by bringing an argument before bosses by CC'ing them in an email. Of course, seeing as how I have not actually witnessed the person doing such a thing, there remains a non zero possibility that I received this story as part of a political maneuver.

What is interesting is that even though I believe that I was not lied to, every maneuver within a social setting is effectively a political move. The only really important distinction is between whether the move is benevolent or malicious. The simple act of warning someone against a genuinely malicious person is a political act in itself because it will adversely affect the person's opinion of that malicious someone. However, due to its good intentions, I expect it is something that is desirable in a professional work environment. In fact, it may be something to be encouraged, seeing as how it is a good way to bring such acts to everyones' attention and thus to reduce the incidence of vicious games at the office.

Darren Shan

Darren Shan...that oh so weird series. I guess it really is a matter of time before people get sick of the traditional styled vampire tales and go with a reinvention of what it is to be a vampire. I picked up the book at the library because I noticed that it bore the Cirque Du Freak series label, and figured I might as well find out what it was about.

One thing I'd say to the author's credit is that the Darren Shan series just isn't your average teen romance masquerading as a vampire story junk. It's quite a bit darker, and has some interesting themes of acceptance and difference. That said, I cannot say I liked it overly much. I mean really...it's really kinda weird having vampires cutting their victims with their nails to draw blood, then using spit to heal the wound back up. Really? Seriously?

That said, I really couldn't be bothered to continue the series. Especially not since I'm reading another dhampir series at this point. Time's limited, and I guess not every youth-targeted vamp novel series is going to appeal to me. The last time I read a good one was probably by Lisa J Smith.

Karate Kid

I got to watch the Karate Kid today. I believe this film is a whole lot less cheesy than the initial offering. Surprisingly enough, I think the remake is actually better than the original. Then again, perhaps I am just biased against orientalist exoticization and all that.

Anyway first things first: It's NOT a karate show. Dammit...just why would they ride on the Karate Kid brand and make it a kung fu flick. Granted, there was a goodly bit more emotional involvement in this show, moving beyond platitudes on the code of conduct in martial arts towards some sort of backstory for the characters. I especially liked that the kung fu master was not just some guy living on a high mountain and not having very much to him besides that.

That aside, the show's really your average good vs evil tale, whereby an underdog protagonist has to deal with a bunch of really powerful and vicious "evil" dudes. Interestingly, the "evil" guys turned out to be more misled than actually intrinsically ill intentioned.

I'd say the show deserves a clean 8.5/10, even though I personally believe that kung fu shows should have fewer of the flashy techniques. That's just my personal bent, and I guess the kinds of things I'd like to see are not quite suited for public viewing.

Points Of Death

I know, I know. I deal with this topic a lot. But of course, mortality is such a fascinating topic to ponder. Right now my focus is towards what one could think of as conceptual death. By conceptual death, I mean how can we map out with some certainty the boundaries that split the living from the dead in the conceptual sense.

For example, someone may be "dead" to others by becoming so overwhelmingly evil that others are horrified into denying that person's status as a living human. That person's personality has been destroyed, and the person becomes conceptually dead. Alternatively, someone may be brain dead and have effectively no personality while lying on the bed, yet this person may well be conceptually alive, as evidenced by the general unwillingness to end this person's life.

As with most conceptual things, we probably already know that different people put different weightages to different acts and statuses. Like a highly religious person may deem another to be conceptually dead for apostasy. However, the fact remains that there is most certainly a tipping point beyond which one is deemed to be too far gone. Also, it may be possible to map out the point values for each individual person, and thus derive just how many "life points" each person really has in the eyes of others. I have not actually created a life points table at this juncture, though.

Promoted To Incompetence

One thing that never ceases to amaze and amuse me is just how it is possible for someone to be promoted into incompetence. When someone is good at their work, they may be assumed to be good enough to try out a superior position. As a result, they are promoted. Of course, we know the cycle eventually winds up promoting someone into a position they are really not very good at. We also know that the sound decision in this situation, to step down, is very difficult to make considering how much prestige is lost from the move.

Allowing people to try out the new position, and pull back if found unsuitable, seems to be a fair solution to such situations. However, the other very real issue is how a superior position's pay is almost invariably higher than that of a lower position. This presents a rather strong disincentive for would-be demoters: even if no prestige is lost, salary would go down as well.

Pay just does not seem to scale well in relation to performance/productivity. A highly productive tier 1 employee may do more for the company than a mediocre tier 2, yet the tier 2 will most likely earn more. It makes little economic sense. In fact, some companies deliberately refrain from promoting a highly skilled employee out of the fear that doing so would result in the loss of a good performer. Were the pay structure to be revised to allow a flatter salary distribution amongst the tiers, it may well be that a superior personnel spread could be achieved.

Ip Man

It is quite interesting that while I watched Ip Man 2 just recently, the bus driver played Ip Man 1 on the trip enroute home from up north. I am very much inclined to agree that Ip Man 1 was superior to its sequel if only just because of its plausibility. Ip Man's tribulations under the Japanese during WWII seemed that much more credible and emotionally engaging than some pride-inspired tiff with the British. It is one thing to be forced to fight for one's family's survival. It is quite another to be obliged to do so simply to preserve honor.

I also appreciated that Ip Man 1 had quite a bit more brutality than in 2. If I am going to watch a martial arts oriented show, I would certainly expect it to have extensive culture. And I dare say it's lived up to my expectations.

I'd think Ip Man deserves 8/10. Blood scores points.

Up North

I had a really nice trip up north last weekend. There certainly is a sort of charm to visiting the old buildings and doing a spot of antique hunting with my partner. If nothing, it was certainly good exercise. I suppose the single biggest blooper in the weekend reel would most certainly be the horrendous 4 hour traffic jam that held us up at the front end.

One thing that I did notice from the trip was how different attitudes can be towards trying things out. My usual approach tends to involve going ahead into area when there is no obvious opposition (signs, barriers, etc) to my doing so. Conversely, there's the conservative approach of proceeding only when permitted. I think that issue has been covered enough, so there is little need to elaborate.

Regardless, it's always nice to bring back goodies for the family. I originally intended to have some for the colleagues, but it turns out that my parents really loved them. No gifts for the office, then. Of course, since I made no overt guarantees to actually get something for the guys, I was in no way obligated to do so. My word is my bond, which is why I would refrain from giving my word too readily.

Talking Across

Today, I got into an argument with one of my friends over an issue. The content is not of much concern to me, since such arguments can arise over just about any issue. The main issue is that it is sometimes possible to engage in talking across (or what I somewhat inaccurately term "parallel arguments") to the extent that it becomes impossible to reach a favorable conclusion even when both parties in the argument are already agreeing with the main points of an argument.

The conclusion of such a situation is often a stalemate, with both parties agreeing in principle on the main thrust of the argument but with either or both sides vehemently refusing to accept this agreement by virtue that either or both sides harbor views that run contrary to either party's idea of complete acceptance. In short, it is an unwillingness to compromise even peripheral points.

This seemingly irrational approach is so precisely because irrationality is thrown into the mix. Specifically, someone got pissed. It surprises me how easily one can inadvertently push the buttons of another in the course of sensible discussions, causing them to degrade into such parallel arguments, where passions prevent agreement where it would have been obvious in less emotionally tainted scenarios.

The challenge, it seems, is to know which buttons each individual has, and to avoid pressing them in the first place. Easier said than done, since besides the obvious ones like being overly aggressive or outright rude, people do tend to have their personal niggles. A more tenable solution, perhaps, would be to find ways to un-press those buttons. The most effective general purpose solution seems to be disengaging for sufficient time such that the other party manages to cool down, without becoming angrier about being ignored. However, it does seem certain that there are more...elegant methods in existence.

Ip Man 2

I watched Ip Man 2 today, and really...it was a film that was a wee bit too dramatic for my taste. Undoubtedly, I was expecting a flick with reasonably realistic martial arts combat (less of the extreme Chinese superhero acrobatics) and it delivered. I later learned that Ip Man was really Bruce Lee's tutor, and that was quite surprising. As for what seemed to be a biography of a master martial artist...it just seemed quite over the top.

While I can understand how the Brits look down on the Chinese, I did wonder whether the duels between a champion boxer and Chinese martial arts masters did actually happen. What certainly did not impress was the fact that the masters were going up against a boxer who clearly massively outclassed them in weight and strength, but seemed quite unwilling to use force multiplier techniques on him. If one would fight to the death against such a foe, and was highly skilled in the arts martial, one would think that one would be willing to use more desperate techniques...

Regardless, it was not an unenjoyable show. I liked it to some extent for its...culture. Yet the only thing that really impressed was the gentleness of Master Ip. That is probably something that I cannot truly comprehend, but something that I can appreciate regardless. I'd say maybe...7/10.

Death, Revisited

I write many entries on death. It is an endlessly fascinating topic, given how much weight people grant this one great unknown. Yet, the conceptualization of death's boundaries seem quite indistinct. What, exactly, constitutes the death of a person?

The common answer is unsatisfactory. There are many specific signs of clinical death, but such definitions are guidelines at best. I believe the specifics of this were covered in an earlier entry. My aunt's tasted death before, and so have I, so that much doesn't necessarily hold true.

What does fascinate me is the idea of cellular death. Now, all cells die eventually, so everyone is likely to have experienced complete cellular death at least a few times in each normal lifetime. What is there to fear from experiencing that one more time right at the end? After all, when the human is defined as clinically dead, a goodly number of the cells still live on (as cells do live) for significantly longer before they finally expire as well.

Death seems to be a fuzzy concept that is really about the gestalt of an entity. Specifics like cellular death do not matter, because the gestalt entity remains consistent even though the precise cellular composition has been nearly completely overhauled after 50 years. The gestalt of the entity goes beyond the cellular, towards the conceptual understanding (for example personal memories) of the same. As long as the gestalt endures, death as a concept does not apply. However, should any key portion of the gestalt perish, then conceptual death occurs.

Kick Ass

I'm gona say this upfront, and what I'm gona say is that Kick Ass was truly kickass. No two ways about it. If you haven't watched it already, I'd say you're missing a lot. A flick like this managed to press every single one of my Woohoo buttons. Deadly pubescent assassin girl. Check. Blood and gore. Check. Dark humor. Check. Humor...oh wait, I already said that. Regardless, some scenes had blood real looking enough that I could almost taste it. Beats a lot of spurting stuff that just looks comical. And the audio. MMmm mmm mmm. Crunch.

What's great...well, our intrepid superhero wanabe is exactly that. A wanabe. And really not terribly good at the superhero business. What I truly appreciate is that all the heroes just aren't uberpowered gods. They get hurt. Badly. Some die. Average criminal goons die (for a change). I've been waiting for flicks like these for a long time. Yet, amidst the death and gore, they managed to sneak in some Tarantino'esque humor in violence. Unfortunately, they do fall short in that regard, since the zany music in some battle scenes just seem forced rather than a true comical part of the whole spiel.

I'd say this one deserves a 9/10 from me, though somewhat to heavily influenced by a personal bent. It's really a love it or hate it kinda show. If taken seriously, it's pretty abominable. But overwise, I'd say it's near perfect. They'd get more points for getting the Tarantino humor done right.

Accessorizing

I am not a big fan of clothes, shoes and handbags. When it comes to those, I usually go with the utilitarian option as far as possible. As for tonsure, I am inclined to go with the simplest, most manageable cut. But things are somewhat different for me when it comes to accessorizing. I like accessories, and I believe the flavor of the month is...chokers. Or slave rings. I can't really decide at this point. Probably both?

Accessories are really quite remarkable. Small things that can say so much in and of themselves. I get warm pretty easily so there goes the option of layering, which does pretty much cut out a goodly number of options for making the statement of the day. On the other paw, I also do get cold so having thin materials in the office would be a bad idea. Yet a well-placed accessory can make all the difference between drab, and somewhat-drab. I like to have a dash of creepy in my stuff, or failing which at least some wolf or dark imagery. It's just a personal preference.

Necklaces, bracelets, chokers, rings, you name it. It's all pure magic. Now, while I am busy gushing over accessories, it reminds me that I have a chaos emblem enroute. What better symbol to wear than a nice spiky emblem that also happens to be the chosen symbol of the Chaos Space Marines. We have a lot in common, methinks. Along with self-destructive tendencies like wearing something that just might cause fatal injuries if one falls in the wrong direction...

A Wedding

I was at my cousin's wedding today and I did my part as the MC. Unfortunately, I slipped up somewhat on the initial presentation, and that is not something I am pleased with at all. Regardless, the rest of the ceremony seemed to proceed smoothly, so hopefully that was the only major issue with my rather sad performance.

Regardless, I had a good chat with the photographer, and it was nice having a bunch of friendly relatives (and soon-to-be relatives) attending. Overall, we did have a pretty good time from the fetching of the bride in the morning to the evening's dinner. Regrettably, I had scant opportunity to get photos taken, at least in part because of the presence of a dedicated photographer and my reluctance to be the designated GWC. The other reason of course was related to my role of the day, and the fact that I was not particularly prone to excessive wakefulness during daylight hours.

I did manage to sneak home for a nap in the afternoon, and I guess it did help somewhat. At the very least I managed to keep myself away from the pit of sleep-deprived grumpiness. It's really little to do with the quantity of sleep I get at night; I think that much is quite sufficient. It's a lot to do with the poor overall quality of sleep. Ah, well.

Time Management

Now that I have started full time work, I find that time management is ever more critical in my life. While it is very nice to be home after sundown, there are only so many hours of the night I can burn before having to head to bed in preparation for the next day. As mentioned before, I do get pretty grumpy from sleep deprivation.

Time management is best accomplished by mapping out the hours spent, and how each hour should be allocated. This can be done by first accounting for how each hour is already spent, and where there are too many hours spent on certain things where others are neglected. I already find that my gaming time is being encroached upon, and something needs to be done about that. Unfortunately, I also find myself without the luxury of spending the past-12mn hours doing what I usually do. It is a delicate balance.

While some may regard the weekends as precious, I would disagree. In fact, the only real use for the weekends would be to settle personal admin, such as warranty claims or postage, yet one would do well to recall that such services are typically closed on weekends to begin with. The other stuff like watching movies would be poorly served by the weekend, considering how obscenely crowded the cinemas can get. In fact, it would be far better to watch movies after work, then get home. Perhaps it does help that I generally feel better in the hours after work, than the hours spent at work itself (however enjoyable work itself may be). The night is young, and it is always good.

Wrongness Of Killing

Sometimes I do think that the perception of wrongness of killing is more socially constructed than it is an actual "instinct" of humans. For practical reasons, it is obviously beneficial that humans can be kept in check so that they are not perpetually at one anothers' throats. Otherwise, society would not be able to function, with its associated deleterious effects.

This sense of wrongness can be seen in how differently people treat the idea of killing for food. A city dweller well insulated from the blood and gore of meat can easily forget just what goes into the daily steak. They are horrified when shown the truth of their sustenance. Yet, humans less insulated from the roots of food have little room for such distaste: it is a matter of eating or perishing. Many do have reverence for the food, because of the difficulty of obtaining it, and showing disrespect might draw the ire of the powers that be which supply them with it.

Where the instinctual might come in is when the sense of empathy is reached with the subject, be it another animal (a pet, perhaps) or another human. This emotional attachment lends killing a strong sense of wrongness not because killing is intrinsically so, but because doing so would induce a great sense of loss. Similar urges exist when one knows that a killing would result in hurting other humans whom one feels empathy with.

These of course go out the window in any life or death situation. Where one is reduced to the lowest common denominator, survival, it is not uncommon to encounter humans at their worst. While some do become heroic in such situations, many others seem to become monstrous instead. There seems to be little to suggest that, in the absence of higher thought processes, humans are primarily inclined to be reluctant to kill. In fact, the opposite seems to be the case. Yet, the average person will very likely not wish to express those views, for various reasons.

Appropriate Responses

One of the many things that constantly bugs me about dealing with humans is the matter of responding appropriately to others' conduct. Specifically asshole conduct. Take for example a hypothetical situation whereby one walks past another, and one shoves the other out of the way.

Of course, the first urge that would come is my bloodlust. It would feel incredibly good to respond in kind. Yet, that is clearly not a very constructive response and I do largely have my bloodlust under control. The other option would be to voice out displeasure over the incident. This, too, may draw unnecessary aggression. It is also a more constructive option than the first considering that the shove may well have been accidental.

Then there's the option of walking away. This is the least palatable response, but is also the most logical. After all, one little shove is hardly capable of causing real damage. Other more confrontational responses may well result in injuries on either side. Unfortunately, it also entails a certain loss of prestige (a show of weakness, to some) and more importantly it is a sort of quiet acquiescence to such unpleasant conduct thus by implication rendering the conduct somewhat acceptable.

The considerations hold true to just about every kind of perceived provocation, and it is frankly very difficult to know which response is most appropriate. All have consequences, and really...my personal bent would be to just walk away. I really don't like to have to bother with humans, and unlike most animals, humans seem incapable of leaving others alone at times. Pride largely does not factor into the equation, especially since the perceptions of others weigh very little on me. Then again, there's always that constant nag to sate my bloodlust once in a while, and it isn't always easy to resist.

How To Train Your Dragon

This show is win. Yup...first line of the review pretty much sums it up. I like the narrative, the action is fluid. The show banks more on character development and dynamic action as opposed to eye-poppingly good graphics, epic lighting and Middle Earth scenery.

Regardless, Dragon somehow managed to juggle between empathy, aggression and humor. In my opinion, they did a bang up job about it. And more importantly, they decided to have a nice epic boss fight as opposed to the way too common epic battle scene. It is refreshing to have a good solid fight with minimal casualties, and a good solid underpinning of humans learning to live in harmony with nature (or rather...animals).

Admittedly I do have a strong bent towards liking any show that promotes harmony with animals/nature, and I also love it when the underdog grows up to be something great other than a plain old veteran warrior. There's plenty of opportunity for forming an illusory empathic link with our intrepid protagonist and his fearsome little dragon, and with a sufficiently grueling boss battle thrown into the mix.

It is a rare show that really does make me feel good about having watched it, and this is most certainly one of them. To the fellas who are reading this and haven't already watched this on the big screen, I say...get your ass in gear and watch it already. 9.5/10.

Iron Man 2

I watched Iron Man 2 and well...it's a wee bit over the top. That's not to say it's something I did not quite expect out of an Iron Man flick. Let's consider for a moment the possibility of a particle accelerator built in a basement just to create an entire new element, or the likelihood of a Russian basement dweller building an arc reactor based suit. Not terribly likely, and certainly somewhere beyond the realm of believability. Of course, this is Iron Man we're talking about, so believability goes out the window anyway.

There's the usual expected Iron Man humor, with Stark being that egotistical fella that he is, and quite the garage technician. I do wonder at the fascination with garage tech. Maybe it's got something to do with just how many great big firms that started off as garage tech. Hmm. Regardless, there's oodles of user interface coolness and epic deployments of the Iron Man suit. Iron Man suit in a briefcase, anyone?

Regardless, the show's chock full of special effects, Stark's egotism and the fast paced action of the Iron Man suit does not disappoint. Especially when War Machine is thrown into the mix. I really do wish they would refrain from introducing new compounded supervillains, though. It was bad enough seeing Deadpool in that other movie... Overall, though, the story does seem kind of weak alongside the special effects fest, with trying to loop in the Avengers and SHIELD while not developing either story particularly strongly. Link up movie alert.

I'd say the movie deserves maybe 7.5/10. It'd be better if there was just more War Machine action, and perhaps some elaboration on Stark's mental state.

Light

I love the light. It is beautiful. Not. No, seriously...bright light hurts the eyes like the dickens, and direct sunlight just stings bigtime. There's a good reason I stick to the shadows as far as possible. It's probably healthier that way. At least for me, that is.

I guess I'd also count as a big power saver when it comes to monitors because I wind down the brightness all the way. Environmentally friendly indeed. Regardless, it does prevent quite a bit of eyestrain from unnecessary retina searing and the associated headaches.

Regardless, I shall return to my classic gripe of office hours. While the office is full of great funny people and is overall an enjoyable place to work at, having to get up in the morning and stay up all day does take its toll. Indeed, despite coming back from a long day's work, I actually wind up feeling pretty refreshed once the witching hour comes cackling by. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for my overall wakefulness during the day.

Behold The IPS

Yup I finally succumbed to the dark side (kicking and screaming, I might add). I abandoned my holy CRT in favor of the hellishly pathetic LCD. Forgive me, for I have sinned, and I now know that I am beyond redemption. Unfortunately, so was my CRT. Redemption can be such a fickle thing.

Now, why on earth would I get an obscenely expensive 24" IPS monitor that is just insanely oversized? Because. Actually it's because that's probably the only monitor that can match my CRT for color fidelity, refresh rates, input lag (sorta, but not really.) and toss in some added dynamic range to boot.

There are TN alternatives out there for easily half the price. Do not think that I was not tempted by their sheer cheapness. Unfortunately, given their comparative color accuracies and the wonderfully sad tonal depth I've seen in the samples at the store, I knew that I would simply have to settle for the best that LCDs currently have to offer.

Of course, given my usual luck with electronics and all things technological, the first model I got just so happened to have a faint but clearly distinguishable color shift from the left to the right. In a monitor of IPS stature, that really is completely unacceptable. I'd talk about all the electronics that died in my presence and my tendency to build up static charges, but that's another story for another day. Right now, it's all about waiting for new stock to arrive so that my bad new monitor may be swapped for a good one.

The Power Of Experience

In game design, what distinguishes a good designer from a great designer is not creativity. In fact, creativity is a prerequisite for the gig in the first place. If one is not creative, they should not be in the line.

The distinguishing factors are in fact influence and experience. A veteran and a newbie may well come up with the exact same creative idea and flesh out every spec that the idea needs in order to get implemented. Yet more often than not, the veteran's idea will come out closer to the original vision than the newbie's. This is where influence and experience come in.

As the adage goes, a designer's only as good as her relationship with the team. If the team hates the designer, they will be quite well incentivized to not implement exactly what the designer wants. It may not be an unprofessional attempt to sabotage the project since they would suffer for it as well, but it would come in the form of dislike for the designer bleeding into dislike for the idea in general. Alternatively, the sheer reputation of a designer might hold some sway, but that will only go so far if everything else about them is downright repulsive. No influence, no implementation. 'nuff said.

Then comes the experience. Even if the designer's absolutely influential, it does not mean that the team will be able to get the ideas out at first pass. Misimplementation is just one possible problem, but easily spotted. If it doesn't match, it's wrong. The other is having an inferior foundation, which is by far a more insidious issue. It is very easy to charge towards milestones while paying little heed to the pipeline and tools used for future iterations. Eventually, the inferior foundation will make itself known, as the even slightly increased delay between iterations will add up over time. It must be noted that few things are ever done right on the first pass, and every additional delay in each iteration will be multiplied by the dozens if not hundreds or thousands of iterations before a feature is finally shipped.

Considering this, it should be clear that while talent will be what distinguishes equally experienced and influential designers, it plays a much smaller role than what many beginner handbooks seem to be pushing. Not everyone can be exquisitely talented, but anyone who pays attention to what is going on can become somewhat more influential and certainly more experienced.

The Nature Of Guilt

Guilt is only possible when the nature of the guilt-inducing act can be comprehended. By definition, someone who does not know that she did wrong is quite unlikely to feel guilty about the wrongdoing. That much is common sense.

However, it is also possible for highly guilt-inducing acts to move to a scale that defies comprehension. The result is the same: people who would feel guilty about a lesser act may well feel minimal guilt at the far greater act that is beyond their comprehension.

Take for example the guilt of murder. Most normal people would probably feel quite guilty over murdering someone. When it turns to mass murder, however, it quickly goes beyond human comprehension. It seems quite unlikely that getting say...10 million people killed is going to weigh on the conscience 10 million times stronger than a single murder would. It is simply beyond what can be comprehended. In fact, it may be possible that the number itself becomes so immense that guilt is practically diluted to nothingness. Where massive numbers of people get slaughtered, it becomes ever easier to shirk the responsibility and project it on others.

An intentional killing is a murder. A billion intentional killings is a statistical reduction.

Scaling Corruption

Corruption simply does not scale terribly well. If power corrupts, I'd rather have absolute power. It's not as if I'm gona be pure either way. And I certainly would not approve of being absolutely powerless.

Of course, corruption itself is not quite so simplistic. It is often subtle, and not something that people would likely notice at first. Just a selfish act here, a little betrayal there...nothing major. Yet later on, as one becomes accustomed to committing little corrupt acts, the ramifications of corruption become less grating on the psyche. Guilt falls away, and it becomes easier to go down that slippery slope. What's it to me if I did one more teeny corrupt act...

Ultimately, the corruption switches from being unintentional to possibly intentional. The acts are now clearly beneficial, though possibly at the expense of others. Benefit becomes an end in itself. Yet it does seem like the marginal guilt reduces as one proceeds down the path of corruption. The first act could've required quite some deliberation, but as one becomes sufficiently corrupted, previously unthinkable acts could become practically second nature.

Acceptance Of The Disabled

It does seem, sometimes, that people with handicaps are better accepted. Of course, it may well be an illusory acceptance, borne of pity and the strength of social taboos. Specifically, the taboo against bullying the weak...or disabled.

On second thought, perhaps a more accurate description of the state of the disabled people would be a state of tolerance rather than acceptance, since they are not so much accepted as they are tolerated. Life certainly isn't plain sailing.

Yet, it is precisely because of these adversities that the disabled are given special leeways that are just not granted to those perceived as normal. It seems that people are unwilling to provide for the special needs of unique individuals unless there's a really compelling reason to do so. Strangely enough, those special treatments are often readily granted to children and animals. Double standards abound.

Vampirism Sucks

Pun intended. It is strange how people can develop a fascination with vampiric creatures. If one considers the practical implications of vampirism, it really does not seem terribly appealing at all. Of course, one caveat will be that I do not regard Twilight-style vampires as vampires at all. They're really more like a bizarre variety of blood drinking Superman. 'nuff said.

Anyway yes, the usual perks should be considered. Superhuman strength, senses, speed, etc etc. Yes we get it, they're superpowered. And immortal...sorta. Cool beans, eh? But then we gota consider the disadvantages as well. Given the fatal allergy to sunlight, it really is no fun to be out at least half of any given day. Perhaps more, if one's in a temperate region. Then there's the inability to effectively enjoy any mortal food. You'd imagine that tasting blood (however tasty, it's effectively got one flavor) for an eternity would not be very nice at all. Not to mention one doesn't actually have a death to look forward to: you're gona have to get off'ed or off yourself at some point if you're sick of existence.

Quite a raw deal, imo. Of course, there is a common mythical alternative. Which is the werewolf. A lot sweeter, seeing as they're all nice and furry and cuddly, can eat regular food and live pretty much a darned long time. Not to mention they're of the superpowered variety, too. Of course there's the same issue of frenzying from time to time, and being quite allergic to silver. It's still a comparatively minor tradeoff.

Given the comparison, I do wonder why people seem to favor vampires over werewolves. It does not compute. Maybe it's to do with the scruffy looking presentation of stereotypical werewolves in comparison to the Victorian refinement of vampires. Come on, wolvies, beef up the PR already. Geez.

Collapse Of Law

Vigilantism exists whenever rule of law is perceived as being inadequate in some way. Perhaps it is an underfunded and/or corrupt police force, or laws that are not agreeable to some people. Simply put, the activities exist for very much the same reason black markets do: to fill a void left by the authorities.

One thing that does get me thinking is exactly when does a vigilante (if ever) have the right to do something righteous despite the righteous act being outlawed due to omission or intention. Taking the example of Batman (again), the Gotham City law has a blind spot whereby certain criminally insane people are not being put to death despite repeatedly escaping and causing the deaths of innocent people. Would it ever be right for Batman to kill them?

Of course, we have the popular perception consideration that takes into account the fact that vigilantes already operate outside the law and are somewhat feared by the people. Vigilantes starting to kill would turn public perception against them. Yet this neglects the point that there are worse things than vigilantes killing small numbers of murderous individuals as opposed to the criminally insane killing large numbers of innocents. Would people choose the lesser evil, or would they continue to support their legal system riddled with loopholes?

Batman's Dilemma

Batman seems on the surface to be exceedingly foolish, perpetually incarcerating homicidal maniacs who invariably go free and proceed to wreak havoc on yet more innocents. Yet, there is the claim that were he to simply kill them, he would be no better for in willingly taking their lives he simply becomes a murdere: very much like one of them.

The utilitarian argument of killing one to serve the needs of many does seem to provide a solution, albeit one that is somewhat disturbing in its implications. Genocide comes to mind. Despite this, there is a niggling doubt about Batman's actions, since his solution does not seem terribly good either.

This may be explained by his motivations, which are actually rather selfish. It does appear to be a case of wanting to push the guilt of killing over to the maniacs, whom he in turn repeatedly punishes. He clearly decided that indirectly killing others through inaction is not criminal in any way, even though he already knew from past experience that incarcerating them would only lead to the deaths of more innocents.

In Batman's case, it would actually be a clear cut case of people not worth saving. It is a case of possibly saving 1 person in exchange for the assured death of 100. It is no longer about saving 1 person, but sacrificing 100 to possibly save 1. In real life, such decisions are of course considerably harder to make, seeing as how the average person is generally not quite as predictable.

MC Sandwich

I am writing this as a documentation of my use of multicoated optics to enhance the performance of vintage camera lenses. A common problem old lenses face is flare and other aberrations resulting from the limited capabilities of primitive coatings. Hypothetically, introducing multicoated optics in the front and rear of the optical path would improve image quality somewhat. The extent of the effect is unknown, and may vary from lens to lens.

I tested this theory on a cheap Makinon 400mm f6.3 optic by placing a well coated Hoya HD filter in front, and using the Olympus EC14 teleconverter behind it. Before using the MC optics, flare was objectionable and the image appeared to be soft due to extensive optical aberrations. After adding on the optics, the image quality was greatly improved and the lens combo could render passable results.

Trying again on the Olympus 300mm f4.5 (a non-MC optic), there was a small but noticeable amount of CA and subtle flare in the images when shot wide open. After the introduction of MC optics, CA and flare completely disappeared. This was unexpected. Of course, being no expert in optical design, I'd expect there are explanations for how/why this happens; besides the obvious ability of MC optical glass to resist flare and the teleconverter's ability to collimate light.

It is expected that similar combinations may be used on other legacy optics to similar effect, and may provide a way to rejuvenate old lenses. However, further experimentation is necessary before it can be established exactly which optics respond best to the treatment. Initial findings suggest that a relatively fast lens is required in order to maintain a usable level of light transmittance for general photography.

Hitting The Swamps

Trudging around on a mangrove boardwalk doesn't sound like something most people would like to do on any particular day, especially not on Good Friday. Well...that's precisely what I did.

Today was a Good Friday indeed, seeing as how many wonders we managed to behold during the short excursion. It was a largely unplanned trip, so we arrived at the mangrove just as the tide was coming in. Not only did we get to briefly witness the mangrove as it usually was at low tide, we got to see the water trickling then rushing into the bog. We even got to see the fruit of the nipah palm for real. At this point, the crabs crawling about suddenly decided to climb some trees, with some crabs reaching pretty much head height. It's probably not just for forage, but also to avoid the deadly monitor lizards.

Then there were the birds, and the occasional archer fish. The egret/heron family birds were present, as were oodles of kingfishers. As the trip drew to a close, I noticed a large bird landing to peck at the fruit hanging from a palm tree. It turns out the bird was a pied hornbill and its mate. Truly rarities, and awesome to behold. What better way could there be to spend a Good Friday, than to appreciate the wonder of the stinking bog.

Limits Of Randomness

Purely random item spawns is a method often used in game design to provide a variety of loot for players. This is intended to let players experience a sense of discovery and anticipation every time they play a level. It is like Christmas all over again.

Unfortunately, random loot has its limitations. Even when loot is balanced towards player levels and game difficulty, sometimes the desired loot simply will not drop. For example, a swordsman may wind up with loads of awesome mage staves while finding lousy to mediocre swordsman equipment. This may be tenable in games where it is intended for players to trade with one another for better loot, but it is plain irritating in single player experiences.

Take for example Dawn of War 2. Loot is randomized so my Devastator squad may never get the high end heavy bolters or their usable equivalents in Terminator armor. A possible solution to this would be to subtly weight loot drops according to fielded troops. For example, having a Devastator squad on the field will automatically grant me a +3% chance of getting Devastator drops. This value may need to be modified in order to make the drops still feel random, but will result in sufficiently high good drops to keep the players happy.

On a separate note, loot must be available for looting. DUH! I am still peeved about levels ending immediately after killing the boss creature, often preventing me from picking up that nice looking wargear that was just dropped. Talk about waste of effort. If loot cannot be automatically retrieved at the end of missions due to balance issues, the least they could do is provide a small window period for players to retrieve the items...