Being A Flake

Dangit I hate to admit it, but I do tend to be a flake at times. Dr Manhattan, might I join your club? Anyway, it can be rather annoying to haul my butt out all the way to a computer fair, only to realize that it wasn't at the usual place. Hmm...right. Perhaps I was mistaken about the location. The logical thing to do, obviously, was to haul butt down to the other usual location. Surprise surprise. It wasn't there.

Now, it's common enough for me to mistake my dreams for reality, and my dreams are vivid indeed. However, it seems highly unlikely for me to mistake the *date* of the event, especially when it was so clearly stated on the computer fair's webpage. This caused me to doubt my sanity, though of course one can never be certain about sanity with one like myself. Nonetheless, it was a good thing to head to a terminal to investigate this further.

After a simple search, the exact same page came up. Ah, I was not mistaken about the date after all. The location, however, appeared to be different from the two usual suspects. Hmm...obvious enough. I must have missed that little detail. Interestingly enough, however, that little detail turned out to be the *country* where the computer fair was held. WHOT!? Yes, another country was holding a computer fair by the same name, with a similar website appearance and whatnot. Lovely. Now let's hear it for the flake! Hip hip! Errr...well I forgot the rest.

Running With Wolves

There are times when I walk alone along a long path at night, and things get really boring. In fact, it is a terrible drudge to move slowly along the pavement. Being used to the speed of four wheels really does little to one's time perception when walking home. Of course, a comparable (though not equivalent) mode of transport would be on four paws.

Sometimes it just feels strange, yanou. Walking along and feeling like running, but on fours instead of on two legs. Now, that wouldn't make sense, since that would be awkward given one's anatomy. Then again, the flights of fancy do not necessarily have to make sense. Probably results of a bored mind on long boring solo trips. Ah, the joys of having a camera as a companion.

God Might Be Random

The assumption most people have about God is that She is personal, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient. They also assume that God created the universe. As a result of the act of creation, the world is created out of the randomness within a controlled random system. This is quite a logical leap, however. Given that God is omni-everything, it is highly limiting to assume that She would act in ways of ordered thought consistent with human sensibilities. After all, the mind of God is by definition unknowable by mere mortals. Randomness as a motivation (or arbitrariness, if you will) is not out of the question. Fun/amusement might be that motivation as well, if one were to imprint God with a human desire.

Then comes the matter of being omni-everything. If that were true, the only thing that would be relatively unpredictable would be the presence of a random system ordered by simple rules. An ordered random system would be unpredictable, and result in the spontaneous generation of order as defined by the simple rules imprinted in the beginning. Life as an ordered system can be entirely possible within the framework of a random system, as the gross characteristics may appear ordered when the core of it is randomness. The particles within humans still move randomly, changing their trajectories, acceleration and velocity in accordance to the rules within the random system.

Since the generation of life may well be random, and not intended to serve some unknowable higher purpose, it is hubris to assume that God is personal. That is, God actually caring about humans at a personal level. For something that is omni-everything observing a controlled random system, it is unthinkable that one particle should be more interesting than another, or at one human be that much more special than another. In fact, the very event of a divine intervention might be the result of the creator of the system adjusting it to ensure that it remains in a state of randomness. After all, a random system moving towards order would become increasingly predictable and that is undesirable by virtue of the fact that an omniscient being/force would already know what would happen.

So why the thought of a personal Creator? Humans have needs. One of the needs is for affirmation or "love". Understandably, most humans simply do not have the energy to "love" everyone else. They can probably do that for a few fellows. What happens, then, when a human is isolated, or feels so due to circumstance? The logical thing to do would be to conceive the idea of something that has unconditional love for the average human, and thus provide a constant supply of "love". If there are instances of divine intervention observed by humans (or thought to be divine intervention), they can understandably be attributed human feelings and assumed (with much hubris) to be the personalized care of an omni-everything deity.

Of course, the consideration of a random God is not without flaws. The key assumption is of course that if there was a reason for creation (of the universe and not earth specifically), and that the reason is fun. This would again assume a human side to Her, and that is quite an assumption given that God isn't quite limited by the foibles of humanity. Moreover, it's understood in terms familiar to the limited cognitive abilities of mortal minds, and the real reason might be well beyond human language and cognition. However, if that were the case, as far as the human intellect is concerned, the reason for creation and everything about life might as well be random: It is ultimately unknowable.

The Recession Effect

When the recession was declared in the press to be particularly serious, I noted an interesting pattern amongst my friends. Everyone was talking about the recession and how they should cut back on spending. Being concerned, of course (heh. heh. heh.), I asked them why that was so? Were they retrenched? Were their parents or relatives fired? The answer was no.

Recessions have an interesting effect on spending, because people are likely to start cutting back on spending simply because of the economic climate instead of their own financial situation. It is understandable to cut back if the finances have gone south back home, of course. However, such caution in a large scale is part of the recession problem in the first place.

Companies that try to cut back in anticipation (or in response to) poorer business tend to decide to fire people sooner or later. These people might not be picked up by other companies because...those are cutting back, too! Eventually there will be a bunch of unemployed people who are unable to spend, further driving business down. The situation worsens. I think most will understand where this cycle leads.

Now, the interesting thing is recovery. Surprisingly enough, the opposite situation can happen during a "recovery". When enough people convince themselves that the recession is over, they start hiring and spending again, driving business back up. The one we're seeing now is likely premature considering the international problems at the moment, but is an illustration of just how sentiment can cause self-fulfilling prophecies.

Camera Favoritism

I loathe to waste assets. Cameras are assets. One thing that's been bugging me when I had multiple cameras was that certain bodies invariably wound up with less utility than others. Especially when one's a "backup" or at least a special purpose unit. That is when camera favoritism occurs: One camera winds up sitting in the dry cabinet for unhappy amounts of time.

My solution to the problem, of course, was to downsize. Where possible, a unit that duplicated the capabilities of another would be pawned off. Ultimately, I wound up with a single dSLR, a large sensor prosumer and a compact camera. Each serves a different function. The compact is a backup take-everywhere unit. Light duty, but gets the job done. The large sensor prosumer is a bit of an oddity. Large and heavy as a dSLR with lens attached, but the prosumer was cheap to obtain and has a really superb lens that is reasonably versatile. It's also relatively silent. As a result, it winds up in situations where good image quality is required but fast shooting speed, the flexibility and heft of multiple lenses prove unnecessary. Finally, there is the dSLR, with fast speed and long glass to take care of the more extreme demands.

While the three bodies admittedly overlap in focal length coverage, there is a reduced possibility of camera favoritism, since each body has its use. Ultimately, I find myself using all three from time to time, as opposed to when I had two dSLR bodies and routinely left one at home because it lacked the capabilities of the other body. It seems like a more tenable solution for the moment.

Superstition And Control

Humans are superstitious animals by virtue of the nature of learning. There are some unknowns that are quite unverifiable, yet the unknowns serve as a fertile seedbed for fears. After all, people do not enjoy the prospect of nasty things happening to them, and it is a small price to pay to adopt rituals that avert such nastiness. Depending on one's culture, that nastiness will vary. Older cultures may have spiritual fears, the contemporary capitalist culture will have materialistic fears.

Given that superstition involves fears of the unverifiable, it is a simple enough matter to exert control on others through manipulation of those fears. It stands to reason that one would wish to minimize those fears, and such a solution comes from the injection of unverifiable snippets disguised as "facts". After all, since both problem and solution are unverifiable, it is easy to assert that the resurgence of unpleasantness is attributable to a lack of adherence to (or belief in) the unverifiable solution. Such is the power of the unverifiable, when humans allow those fears to force them to cling to a superstition.

Once this control has been established, one needs to have either an ongoing unknown that continually threatens to shatter that illusory peace that salves the psyche, or to continually establish new unknowns to keep the fear fresh. If one can keep that momentum going, the constant presence of problems and introduction of solutions can keep the superstitious loyal for extended periods of time, perhaps sufficient to establish one's dominion over a large group of people for enough time to do extensive damage to whatever one detests.

Takes A Dunkin

I suppose today's entry will be somewhat...different from the usual stuff. That is, my phone survived a rather unique and really rather disgusting event in its product lifespan. I was in the toilet and the phone decided to take a little walk out of my admittedly really shallow pocket. After slip sliding off my thigh, onto the floor, across the really well polished tiles, it took a nice smooth slide across porcelain right into the water. 10/10. Oh, and it was yellow water, thanks to yours truly.

After a brief moment of bemusement (that the phone was actually still working underwater) and horror (that the phone was actually still underwater), I had to reach a paw in to grab stinky out, flick the water off, then strip it down so that the battery wouldn't fry anything for good. Thankfully, it seemed to be mostly functional at that point, so I had high hopes that it'd power up just fine after a rest in my dry cabinet.

Of course, it did survive, with all functionality intact. Surprising, considering that it wasn't exactly marketed as a weatherproof phone. Beats the snot out of the E3s which didn't survive a washing, huh. Then again, this is something that I would not be particularly thrilled to retry. As a side note, no, the phone doesn't smell of pee and/or poo since it's been cleaned. Yeah. Cleaned. *sniffs* Eww.

It's Not The Same

It's that time of year again. The last one in a line of 4. Semester's over, summer break's in, new computer, room cleared and messed up again. It almost seems the same. Theoretical freedom and time to hunker down to do the things I love. But then I look back on everything else and I find that things just aren't the same anymore.

Now, one key difference is responsibilities. Never was I ever obliged to actually do something during my summer breaks. That's nasty. People have few enough holidays as things go. One thing is I never can really cut loose when there are responsibilities. I do not like leaving things hanging, so I get my butt out there and slaughter them as best I can. Then another takes its place. And another. And another. It never ends, does it?

Still, I guess I'll still try to get my life back in shape. Things change, nostalgia remains. Therein lies the bite. Well whatever. New rig, no more restrictions. It's time to have some fun!

Room Clearing

Clearing my room from the aftermath of a semester of study makes me think of a game of musical chairs. No kidding. It really does. Now, the early stages of cleaning up are really more like a massacre. One moment there's a lot of stuff everywhere. Later on, it all just...disappears.

Then comes the hard part. After tossing out and/or rearranging everything, there remains the question of what can be done about the stuff that's not meant to be thrown away. The question seems easy enough, until one realizes that all the drawers, bookshelves and other containers are full as well.

Of course, this is really an exercise in irrationality. Obviously, if something's been left alone for long enough that they're forgotten and left in a drawer for ages, they're not terribly important. Aside from important documents in archive, of course. If that's the case, it's really a no brainer about what should be tossed. Then there's the case of the Too Cool To Toss syndrome.

TCTT is something any RPG'er will be familiar with. Suddenly the inventory's full of really cool stuff that the player can't bear to part with, then another cool item pops up. It seems that something's gona out-cool something else. Hence musical chairs. Toss the less cool item out to make way for the cooler one.

And the cycle continues with every storage space in the room. That's where the real irrationality comes in. Shouldn't most storage spaces be devoid of anything but truly archive quality stuff? Well, I guess ultimately it's a case of deferred decision making. I'll just decide on all that stuff at my next spring cleaning =p

Wolverine

What can I say? I am disappointed. Scratch that, I am deeply disappointed. When it comes to a movie about my favourite mutant, I pretty much expected a lot more adherence to canon. I mean, they've been doing just fine with other comic book adaptations lately, so this was really pretty bad.

Hmm...how do I begin? Frankly, the early part of the movie was fine. I liked the introduction though they largely skipped through Wolverine's history in the Wars. Nevermind that Victor really wasn't his brother. In fact, I was rather more pleased by the portrayal of Victor's growing madness than I was with Wolverine's development as a character. Although...well, this being Wolverine, I kinda expected a bit more blood and violence (I know, I know, it goes against his personality, but I've watched 300 and was spoiled by it) Anyway, Gambit was really quite the character in this show. Way better at what he did than I remembered. Sort of a Gandalf, really. That's not to say I wasn't pleased with the eye candy.

Unfortunately, that's where the producers started taking excessive artistic liberties. The bitter rivalry between Wolverine and Sabretooth started to look more like sibling rivalry over who's the best than something truly personal resulting from Sabretooth killing (instead of pretending to kill) Wolverine's beloved. Wolverine seemed a lot more enthusiastic about the Weapon X project, and came out of it a lot more whole than I remembered.

The worst part was Deadpool. When Wade first made his appearance, he was practically a Jedi, cutting bullets out of the air with a pair of katanas disguised as blurs. After he emerged as Deadpool, he was downgraded by having katanas stuffed in his wrists instead, had his mouth sealed (How does Deadpool trashtalk like this!?) and had Cyclops's eyebeams. That most certainly deviates way too much from the real thing. Poor Wade!

Overall, I'd say the movie would've gained a lot of points if they actually cut out the last half hour or so of total nonsense towards the end. But since they didn't, and I respect the director's decision, I'd say this movie's a 6/10

Earth Hour

Earth Hour is a very nice gesture in support of the idea of environmental conservation, and to make everyone realize just how much technology has infiltrated everyday lives. It makes people think about just what life would be like were there no electricity for a mere hour, yet provides an experience that is quite a stark contrast to just what we're used to at that time when we do have electrical power.

However, I fear the gesture is very much like what V-day and Christmas have come to mean: A single feel-good day/moment, then back to the usual programming. In light of the demands of everyday life and the routines of work/entertainment, it becomes all too easy to forget about environmental conservation. It is too easy to waste electricity without realizing it. On a large scale, this may mean that the effect Earth Hour has on the big picture can be quite minimal.

Perhaps it would be better if Earth Hour were combined with a daily reminder. A constant presence of a meter, or even one of those cheesy stickers would probably work mighty fine in conjunction with Earth Hour. With enough awareness, it might even be Earth Hour all hours...not just during an artificial lights out hour, but a conservationist lifestyle incorporated into everyday living.

The Soul Of Things

Things have souls. Even objects and constructs have souls. Without which, they would be but piles of dross. What is gold without the value people believe that it holds? What is air without its oxygen? What is a movie without its key scene?

When one censors a film, one must take care that they do not remove key parts that give it its true flavor. The censors must be careful that they do not reduce a show from one about fighting for one's ideals to one that merely glorifies violence. They should avoid creating a mangled piece that is without meaning or purpose.

What would V for Vendetta be, if Hollywood had decided that it would be fine to include the eucharist scene? What would it be like without Valerie's scene? It is well and good to portray a struggle against an oppressive authority, yet how is that struggle different from that of every stereotypical story of a rebel that succeeds against the odds? V was different by showing the State for what it was: Draconian, but also hostile to the sexual minorities and perpetuating the hypocritical lies and corruption that some religions promote in V's world. That much would have been lost had the two been removed. That is the soul of V. Without which, V would just be any other struggle-against-authority show, a rebel without a cause.

The Misplaced Enjoyment Of Money

The love of money is a dangerous thing, when laced with the wrong motivations for actually loving it. To be truthful, I'm not even sure it's possible to love money itself in a "correct" way, since it's really money's buying power that is attractive. In fact, money left unspent is just a large pool of potential, and stays as potential until actually spent.

Of course, it's also true that money kept in reserve has its uses, such as for unforeseen crises. Such as sudden unemployment, illness or something of the sort. It pays to keep such a reserve. Yet the reserve provides such comfort that some have transferred their enjoyment from the items money is spent on, to actually watching their bank accounts grow. From an individual's perspective, that really makes little sense since they'd be quite unable to enjoy those funds once they're old and infirm, or if they suddenly die.

Sometimes I wonder at those who just love watching their accounts grow (while not actually saving for anything, like a crisis fund or the next really big ticket purchase like housing). For those, wouldn't it simply make more sense to just program a number simulation that constantly ticks up the amount of money in a virtual bank account? After all, given their spending habits, they'd never spend enough to realize that the numbers are fake, so all they get would be pure, unadulterated satisfaction.

Can: i-bomb?

I had this hilarious experience related to me by my teacher earlier today. He said that someone on the bus reported that there was a suspicious package on board, causing the driver to stop the bus and investigate. Obviously, the item was rather alarming: It looked exactly like a sealed can of no-frills tuna.

Now, we all have watched those action films, where some tiny device winds up blowing up most of a city block. Or so it seems. Clearly, the bus driver figured that this was it. It was the i-bomb. Scary stuff. Just as any rational movie-goer, the bus driver decided that the can of tuna could've been some anti-matter conversion device, so he stopped the bus.

Everyone out. Nobody's taking any chances. Not in times like these anyway. Not when the American Dream came true and we wound up living it.

How Straight Are You?

I find it rather amusing when people say things like hey! that gay person hasn't tried sex with males/females (whichever's applicable), so they clearly have not met the right person and thus are gay. At a glance, it seems like a rather compelling argument. One does not truly know unless one tries, right?

Unfortunately, nobody ever seems to consider the converse. I mean, every other person who thinks he/she is straight has never actually tried sex with males/females, right? Wouldn't that make them potential gays who never found the right gay lover?

I also take issue with the rather bizarre idea that sex is the defining factor behind one's straight/gayness. I mean, whatever happened to virginity till marriage (or civil union or whatever have you)? If people believe that, no wonder gay (and straight) people are being all promiscuous, ever-eager to please the fickle masses about their true sexuality.

Children Are Vampires

Children are vampires. That much everyone can probably agree on, in principle. Now, the allegation is pretty obvious, all things considered. First, we have to begin with the definition of a vampire.

A vampire is an undead, blood sucking monster. From the various vampire lore, it is not always established that vampires are indeed vulnerable to sunlight or holy relics. Since nobody can really confirm that, we shouldn't jump to conclusions. Most do, however, agree that a stake to the heart can be rather debilitating for a vampire. Hence, we'll go with that for now.

Let's consider the child, then. Children were once fetuses. They start off sucking blood in the womb (yes, yes we know the biology, but it sure looks like it =p). Check that off. Children, as defined by adults, have no life. Technically, that would make them undead. Let's check that, too. Children, especially those under the age of 2, are called "little monsters". Right. Good. So we have an undead, blood-sucking little monster. Hence, we may conclude that children are indeed vampires, though many do grow out of that phase. That's why most adults no longer truly believe in vampires.

Of course, I did postulate that, based on this particular logic, other creatures may be vampires, too. Take for example Hitler. Given the Christian propensity to sing about drinking blood, I would have to assume that they are, at least metaphorically (and some claim literally) blood drinkers. Hitler was Christian. That makes him a blood drinker. Just about everyone agrees that he's a monster. There goes another. And of course, as a Nazi, he certainly had no life. If Hitler's a vampire, and so are children, beware, people. Vampires walk amongst us.

Christianity Out Of Context

There are perhaps few things as alarming as hearing certain Christian hymns taken entirely out of context. They are so freaky, in fact, that I think any wanabe demon or vampire worshipper could probably take the lyrics verbatim and change the background track some, then use it as their worship song. Or dirge. Or whatever that may be called.

If one steps back from the religious considerations, and takes the lyrics literally, one would be hearing songs about craving for blood, drinking it and eating (human) flesh. Rather unsavory things that are frowned upon in polite Christian society, methinks. Sometimes when I hear that, I feel a very strong urge to bring in some animal sacrifices, draw a rather elaborate arcane-looking summoning circle right in the middle of the church sanctuary, then slaughter the animals and babble some untelligible spell. It'd sound like I was talking in tongues anyway.

How Free Is Free?

Free will is truly the ability to make and execute decisions within the framework of what one knows, and what one is able to do. Everything beyond those boundaries is beyond the limits of free will. Choice becomes irrelevant when one lacks either the knowledge or ability to do anything about it.

Consider the case where I create a species of creature that's only capable of doing bad things, as defined by my concept of good and bad. While they are perfectly free to operate without my intervention, or imposing my will on their thoughts after their creation, they are also unable to fathom non-bad actions, because I created them to be so. Hence, within their range of awareness, they have free will. Unfortunately, I am quite aware that they do not, since I am aware that "bad" is not the limit of the possibilities of the range of actions.

Hypothetically, the only way to truly have free will is to be omnipotent and omniscient. That's because one would know all, and be able to do whatever one decides on. Of course, then we'd then be faced with the innate limits of power: The more powerful one gets, the less one is able to choose to do nothing. Every action and inaction one chooses will have consequences. Then again, if we regard the choice to not make a choice to be excluded from the considerations of free will, an omnipotent and omniscient being would truly have free will.

The Importance Of Humanity

It is Friday the 13th. Lovely day, it turns out. The 13th really has too much bad press. See? If you show it lots of love and concern, Friday the 13th will not come and bite you in the back. Do unto others and whatnot...

I was meditating on the importance of humanity, and I figure that humanity is an artificial construct that is seriously over emphasized. For one, nobody can really define what humanity is. Is it genetics? Conduct? Thought patterns? Sure, everyone's got a subjective opinion of humanity, which is quite invariably linked to the cultural beliefs that they hold (and probably take to be natural and globally generalizable).

So the question really is whether humanity as a concept is important. While it arguably encompasses concepts like compassion, kindness and other things deemed to be "good", it will be quite sufficient to be a "good" creature, regardless whether one is truly human. Just how important is humanity then?

Knowing People

I am constantly disturbed at how readily my parents would rely on first impressions to get their measure of people. That is, they're quite happy to have one look at the person and his/her conduct, then decide whether they want to get to know the person better or whether to be friends and such.

The problem here is that they're essentially allowing confirmation bias to rule their heuristic. Say you decide that someone's bad, so you look out for bad things and refuse to get to know the person better. In all probability, even rather excellent specimens of humanity would be prone to making highly visible mistakes from time to time. Should one be looking out for those same defects, one would feel justified in concluding that the said people were just...bad.

Then again, my method is probably not quite suited to what most are used to. It may even be deemed to be socially naive. However, I stand by my belief that people should be given a chance, and that it takes months to truly have an estimate of someone's measure. So even if someone gives me a seriously bad gut reaction, I'd be wary but not dismiss the person offhand. There can be treasure in junk, after all. Of course, if it is proven that the person means me harm, or has no intention whatsoever of being friendly, I think there's no shame in admitting that someone's just not friend material. At the very least, though, try to avoid dismissing anyone offhand.