I was talking with a co-worker earlier about some procedures, and what to do in X situation, mostly trying to impart some of my experience on the job, when he came across an official procedures document, that apparently mentioned me in it. Upon examination I found some things I had written when, for lack of a better word, bugging the procedures in the first place. Apparently the people in charge of said procedures and programs, decided to just lift my notes whole and use them. Looking at the document, all my notes showed no bad intentions were in mind when they did so, on the contrary this only enforced a most positive view of me. But what it really did was remind me, that although I've never been the "Cool" or the "Popular" person, I've also been the person most remembered and respected.
The co-worker also enforced this ego by then saying "You're a celebrity and didn't even know it"
My only comment was, "That seems to happen a lot"
I mean, growing up, I'd somehow get my picture in the paper, not as the focus or sole person highlighted in the article, but instead usually with a group of people, or about some project going on. It was rarely with the same people either, but instead it was as if I was riding some human interest wave, from one project to the next. Bouncing between the local newspaper, to the school paper, to the state paper and back. And every time, my name would wind up in the article, and people would notice.
I unconsciously tried side stepping this unintentional "be the story" by joining journalism my last year in high school. I figured, if I wrote the paper, I wouldn't be the paper. Unfortunately, because I didn't concentrate fully on writing, and instead still did a lot of other things my senior year, from founding a NJROTC at my school, to doing a stint as a page for the State House of Representatives, I still ended up in other people's articles. Also of course in an article about the school newspaper, so there was no escaping it there.
Finally I did leave most of the evident very minor celebrity status behind when I went off to college, only to begin a new quasi-very minor celebrity adventure, but having my name show up in the oddest of places, years after I'd left jobs in some cases, because when I left, I usually left a place better, with a bit more understanding, and apparently quite a bit of respect.
Thus, whenever I'm reminded of this unintentional life I lead, I'm glad to know that although I'm not famous as the world knows famous. Instead I'm famous in the way I want to know famous, as the cog that made a difference, and was proud of it
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Friday, October 19, 2007
When reading, doesn't enjoy
The fact that you are reading this, means you sometimes read things, not because you enjoy them, but because if you don't read it, you feel you've missed out on something. Not to say that my writing is terrible, just that my blogging has never been terribly consistent. On the other hand, what has brought up this topic isn't blogging, but instead when it comes to reading novels.
Currently, I'm attempting to read a novel, that I will only refer to as "That piece of Crap" or [TPOC] for short. I'm also going to refrain from specifics on the plot, as I am sure that if I discussed it at all, it'd be evident pretty quickly as to what I was reading. All I can say, is that it's science-fiction, it's relatively new, and it's a load of horse manure.
I picked up the novel because it was supposed to be similar to some earlier stories I had enjoyed, although more up to date, and on today's heartbeat. Like other new novelists, the beginning was slow. Fine, I'm used to trudging through a hundred pages to get to the meat of a novel. However in TPOC, I'm half-way done, and I can already tell it's a half-assed merging of three or four other masters of writing, full of plot holes, one-dimensional characters, and a view of the world only an idiot could enjoy. Yet, I still trudge on, with the hopes the author will redeem himself.
My question though, is it worthwhile to finish reading something you consider that atrocious. Especially if you aren't a critic or editor? Or should you continue to give it the benefit of doubt, until you have completed it, then vow to burn the book and never case eyes on the likes of it again?
*UPDATE* Got about two-thirds through the novel and gave it up. Maybe I'll go back and finish it some time, but since then I've found a lot of other books to try that aren't nearly as bad. Also helps I've been enjoying them on a new electronic device, but that's another post far in the future.
Currently, I'm attempting to read a novel, that I will only refer to as "That piece of Crap" or [TPOC] for short. I'm also going to refrain from specifics on the plot, as I am sure that if I discussed it at all, it'd be evident pretty quickly as to what I was reading. All I can say, is that it's science-fiction, it's relatively new, and it's a load of horse manure.
I picked up the novel because it was supposed to be similar to some earlier stories I had enjoyed, although more up to date, and on today's heartbeat. Like other new novelists, the beginning was slow. Fine, I'm used to trudging through a hundred pages to get to the meat of a novel. However in TPOC, I'm half-way done, and I can already tell it's a half-assed merging of three or four other masters of writing, full of plot holes, one-dimensional characters, and a view of the world only an idiot could enjoy. Yet, I still trudge on, with the hopes the author will redeem himself.
My question though, is it worthwhile to finish reading something you consider that atrocious. Especially if you aren't a critic or editor? Or should you continue to give it the benefit of doubt, until you have completed it, then vow to burn the book and never case eyes on the likes of it again?
*UPDATE* Got about two-thirds through the novel and gave it up. Maybe I'll go back and finish it some time, but since then I've found a lot of other books to try that aren't nearly as bad. Also helps I've been enjoying them on a new electronic device, but that's another post far in the future.
Friday, January 26, 2007
Alcohol, Religion, and Economics (Part 2)
In the previous post I explained what the situation was. In this post I'm going to try to expound on the situation, interjecting some of my own opinions.
Essentially, there are a multitude of problems concerning this religion versus economics squabble brewing in Minneapolis. First and foremost, in a land of freedom of religion, does a company, providing arguably a public service, have a right to discriminate against a religious faction, if that faction hinders and at times halt that public service?
Depending on the example from history you might find, you can say both yes, and no. The biggest example of yes they could and should, actually springs from rather recent times and concerns this nations struggle with racism, in which groups, such as the Klu Klux Klan blocked public services (hospitals, schools, water fountains). The Klu Klux Klan was then prosecuted and basically eliminated as a group by the federal government.
On the other hand, if you were to look at the current debate over Abortion you could see something of a see-saw to the same argument. Abortion by many definitions is an economic versus Religious debate, where the Religious side is claiming it's tenements do not allow or proscribe that anyone, even those not of their religion should be able to have an Abortion. In the current battle this comes down to meaning that doctors have the right not to perform an abortion, if they believe it's against their religion. At the same time, Anti-Abortion groups have with differing levels of severity been restricted from impeding those who want to have an Abortion. Thus Anti-abortionists still picket many clinics that offer this service, but if they cross the line from picket to active refusal, such as by hitting, grabbing, or causing damage they are then actively prosecuted for discrimination and violence. The latest wrinkle to this debate is that a number of supposed Abortion clinics have been popping up where they are really controlled by Anti-abortionists who find ways to delay or convince their patients not to have an Abortion. So far, this unusual tactic when found out, has mostly been closed down by immediate press revelations.
Which brings us back to this problem of alcohol and cab drivers. By all rights, this attempts of the MAC appear to have been honest attempts at compromise to allow the cab drivers their religious freedom, while lessening the impediment of the public. The drivers on the other hand have decided that all these attempts have only been about discrimination and thus have decided to act like it.
The hook in the matter is that although they can say they are being discriminated if the MAC decides to restrict them for refusing a service, they, themselves, are honestly discriminating against others by their very own refusal. They are trying to foster a set of rules on their attempted passengers, which the passengers don't wish to agree to. In most societies where this happens, it then becomes the passengers right to not use that service and instead opt for one which allows the transportation of alcohol. But in this environment, where the cabs all look similar and it's hard to distinguish between them, this attempt to use the service that allows them is causing an undue hardship delay.
My own opinion is thus, in a society of freedoms, any attempt to curtail another's rights, whether religious or not, should be struck down. Thus, the cab driver's wants to not allow the transportation of alcohol in their cabs, although lawful, well meaning, and within their right, should not give them the authority to block a person from using a cab in a timely fashion.
If they want to continue this religious choice, either they should then accept a compromise that allows a person to choose their cabs, or they should expect to lose the business of passengers.
As an aside, while working on this post I got in to a lengthy discussion with some co-workers about this particular issue. From his POV (Point of View), the only "discrimination" that was going on was against the cab drivers. Thus from his POV, he believes either the cab drivers will eventually compromise, or the airport will just restrict all alcohol transportation. I disagreed and then we launched in to a long debate on discrimination, which I will post at another time.
Essentially, there are a multitude of problems concerning this religion versus economics squabble brewing in Minneapolis. First and foremost, in a land of freedom of religion, does a company, providing arguably a public service, have a right to discriminate against a religious faction, if that faction hinders and at times halt that public service?
Depending on the example from history you might find, you can say both yes, and no. The biggest example of yes they could and should, actually springs from rather recent times and concerns this nations struggle with racism, in which groups, such as the Klu Klux Klan blocked public services (hospitals, schools, water fountains). The Klu Klux Klan was then prosecuted and basically eliminated as a group by the federal government.
On the other hand, if you were to look at the current debate over Abortion you could see something of a see-saw to the same argument. Abortion by many definitions is an economic versus Religious debate, where the Religious side is claiming it's tenements do not allow or proscribe that anyone, even those not of their religion should be able to have an Abortion. In the current battle this comes down to meaning that doctors have the right not to perform an abortion, if they believe it's against their religion. At the same time, Anti-Abortion groups have with differing levels of severity been restricted from impeding those who want to have an Abortion. Thus Anti-abortionists still picket many clinics that offer this service, but if they cross the line from picket to active refusal, such as by hitting, grabbing, or causing damage they are then actively prosecuted for discrimination and violence. The latest wrinkle to this debate is that a number of supposed Abortion clinics have been popping up where they are really controlled by Anti-abortionists who find ways to delay or convince their patients not to have an Abortion. So far, this unusual tactic when found out, has mostly been closed down by immediate press revelations.
Which brings us back to this problem of alcohol and cab drivers. By all rights, this attempts of the MAC appear to have been honest attempts at compromise to allow the cab drivers their religious freedom, while lessening the impediment of the public. The drivers on the other hand have decided that all these attempts have only been about discrimination and thus have decided to act like it.
The hook in the matter is that although they can say they are being discriminated if the MAC decides to restrict them for refusing a service, they, themselves, are honestly discriminating against others by their very own refusal. They are trying to foster a set of rules on their attempted passengers, which the passengers don't wish to agree to. In most societies where this happens, it then becomes the passengers right to not use that service and instead opt for one which allows the transportation of alcohol. But in this environment, where the cabs all look similar and it's hard to distinguish between them, this attempt to use the service that allows them is causing an undue hardship delay.
My own opinion is thus, in a society of freedoms, any attempt to curtail another's rights, whether religious or not, should be struck down. Thus, the cab driver's wants to not allow the transportation of alcohol in their cabs, although lawful, well meaning, and within their right, should not give them the authority to block a person from using a cab in a timely fashion.
If they want to continue this religious choice, either they should then accept a compromise that allows a person to choose their cabs, or they should expect to lose the business of passengers.
As an aside, while working on this post I got in to a lengthy discussion with some co-workers about this particular issue. From his POV (Point of View), the only "discrimination" that was going on was against the cab drivers. Thus from his POV, he believes either the cab drivers will eventually compromise, or the airport will just restrict all alcohol transportation. I disagreed and then we launched in to a long debate on discrimination, which I will post at another time.
Alcohol, Religion, and Economics
Via Cnn.com comes an article about a group of cab drivers in Minneapolis (Minnesota) who have been refusing to transport anyone carrying alcohol. What makes the situation more complicated then simple economic driven supply and service is that the group of cab drivers are Muslims, predominately from Somalia.
Essentially the Muslim religion teaches that transportation, consumption, or any other use of alcohol is strictly forbidden, and a sin. Thus the cab drivers, even though they should be driven by economic forces to transport another person, even one not of their religion, who has partaken or is carrying alcohol, would be committing a sin to do so.
Normally in a mixed religion nation such as ours, this particular problem doesn't crop up that much, as the mix is great enough that a person refused a service because of religious issues could easily get service from some one else. The problem in Minneapolis is that the group of cab drivers refusing service is so large, that it's causing major bottleneck problems at the local airport.
According to the article, in the last years approximately 5,400 people were initially denied service from a taxi at the airport at least once, for this reason alone. One commuter interviewed even described being denied a taxi cab five times, and having to wait twenty minutes for carrying a sealed bottle of wine he had bought on his vacation.
The local authorities (Metropolitan Airport Commission or MAC) then tried to step in and work out a compromise that wouldn't violate the religious freedoms of one group, or discriminate against the freedom of another group. Unfortunately what should have been a simple matter of compromise took a wrong turn when the MAC was rebuffed twice.
The first time then went to local religious leaders and asked for a special dispensation for the cab drivers. The local leaders disagreed and reiterated the doctrine against transportation of alcohol. The MAC then tried a different approach of asking those who didn't want to transport alcohol to use some identifying symbol on their cabs so that patrons could know which they couldn't use, and which they could. They were again rebuffed as the group cried this discrimination.
Now the MAC has been left with little choice but to either impose harsh penalties on cab drivers refusing to pickup passengers for trying to follow their religious faith, or to get hit with lawsuits and other economic penalties for not providing a service for their customers.
Essentially the Muslim religion teaches that transportation, consumption, or any other use of alcohol is strictly forbidden, and a sin. Thus the cab drivers, even though they should be driven by economic forces to transport another person, even one not of their religion, who has partaken or is carrying alcohol, would be committing a sin to do so.
Normally in a mixed religion nation such as ours, this particular problem doesn't crop up that much, as the mix is great enough that a person refused a service because of religious issues could easily get service from some one else. The problem in Minneapolis is that the group of cab drivers refusing service is so large, that it's causing major bottleneck problems at the local airport.
According to the article, in the last years approximately 5,400 people were initially denied service from a taxi at the airport at least once, for this reason alone. One commuter interviewed even described being denied a taxi cab five times, and having to wait twenty minutes for carrying a sealed bottle of wine he had bought on his vacation.
The local authorities (Metropolitan Airport Commission or MAC) then tried to step in and work out a compromise that wouldn't violate the religious freedoms of one group, or discriminate against the freedom of another group. Unfortunately what should have been a simple matter of compromise took a wrong turn when the MAC was rebuffed twice.
The first time then went to local religious leaders and asked for a special dispensation for the cab drivers. The local leaders disagreed and reiterated the doctrine against transportation of alcohol. The MAC then tried a different approach of asking those who didn't want to transport alcohol to use some identifying symbol on their cabs so that patrons could know which they couldn't use, and which they could. They were again rebuffed as the group cried this discrimination.
Now the MAC has been left with little choice but to either impose harsh penalties on cab drivers refusing to pickup passengers for trying to follow their religious faith, or to get hit with lawsuits and other economic penalties for not providing a service for their customers.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
A blog is a Journal
When sitting down to write every day, I usually have to brain storm for several minutes (err hour). What should I write today, I muse. Which inevitably becomes, what's the focus of the blog? You see blogs, from my perspective, are supposed to be places where someone comments or informs the reader about something, such as people, or places, or news, or about other blogs. These can take the form of opinion pieces, or even just a link fest telling people whats the hip today. But they are still, first and foremost, a portal of information.
Again, why does this matter?
When I write pieces like this, I don't feel like I'm a commentator, or a portent to information. Instead I feel like I'm writing in an diary, only one that is online. This counter to the fact I'm writing a post on a site with blogger in the address only adds to internal debate over whether I'm seriously writing, or just venting where someone might see, and still not care.
So every time I begin to write here, I have to go this internal debate over what to write, and why. Because if I'm not a blogger, and this isn't a blog, then what is it? On the other hand, maybe it's just my perception that's wrong.
Via Dictionary.com, and according to Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.6) a blog is: an online diary; a personal chronological log of thoughts published on a Web page.
It is not however, strictly journalistic, although other definitions use journal in them. Then again, I've been using the web long enough I remember livejournal before blogging became the term to use.
What all this really adds up to, is that why contemplating the focus of this blog, I decide two things. One, I can't figure out what my focus interest is just yet. And two, the one entry a day must be an opinion piece, either on life, or something I've read that day. Other then that, I can have more then one entry a day, it's just the first entry, must be an opinion post.
Really, why did this all come up? Beyond the semantic impression of the word blog, I had been debating whether a review piece on a book I picked would fit in to the style here, and whether it would suffice for the one post a day. Nope was answer I came up with, for the later not the former. Later on I'll post reviews of books, movies, and maybe even link some popular stories, but every day I'll start with some rant, opinion, or other rumination. And eventually I'll find a balance once more.
Again, why does this matter?
When I write pieces like this, I don't feel like I'm a commentator, or a portent to information. Instead I feel like I'm writing in an diary, only one that is online. This counter to the fact I'm writing a post on a site with blogger in the address only adds to internal debate over whether I'm seriously writing, or just venting where someone might see, and still not care.
So every time I begin to write here, I have to go this internal debate over what to write, and why. Because if I'm not a blogger, and this isn't a blog, then what is it? On the other hand, maybe it's just my perception that's wrong.
Via Dictionary.com, and according to Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.6) a blog is: an online diary; a personal chronological log of thoughts published on a Web page.
It is not however, strictly journalistic, although other definitions use journal in them. Then again, I've been using the web long enough I remember livejournal before blogging became the term to use.
What all this really adds up to, is that why contemplating the focus of this blog, I decide two things. One, I can't figure out what my focus interest is just yet. And two, the one entry a day must be an opinion piece, either on life, or something I've read that day. Other then that, I can have more then one entry a day, it's just the first entry, must be an opinion post.
Really, why did this all come up? Beyond the semantic impression of the word blog, I had been debating whether a review piece on a book I picked would fit in to the style here, and whether it would suffice for the one post a day. Nope was answer I came up with, for the later not the former. Later on I'll post reviews of books, movies, and maybe even link some popular stories, but every day I'll start with some rant, opinion, or other rumination. And eventually I'll find a balance once more.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Step One, Two, Three
And then again, maybe I'm not...
For anyone just joining us, let's recap. Due in no small part to several nudges and comments over the last week, I had finally decided to make another concentrated push at writing again. Large or small I was going to set aside some time each day, give myself a deadline, and write... anything. So what happens after the first day? I run in to one of my not so unusual sleepless periods.
That is it was the weekend, I didn't have to work, and of course I couldn't sleep. Oh I still averaged 5 hours a day, it just that it came in dribs of 1-2 hours at a time. This of course causes me to be even more lethargic then my normal and thus any desire to, well do anything vanishes. I end up not cleaning, cooking, working on my house, or even playing a game. I basically veg all day long, trying to maybe become interested in something, tv, music, anything at all, and not succeeding.
Luckily this only happens maybe every other month or two, and is usually sparked because I'm overworked, over slept, and just not focused on anything. Others who I've confided in have put forward the theory that I might be a little manic depressive. The major flaw with this theory of course being I'm never in the manic phase. Plus when I'm lethargic I'm not depressed, just uninterested.
Is it some sort of early, early Alzheimer's? Doubtful, as I have only one grand parent with Alzheimer's, and they didn't begin to exhibit problems till their late 60's early 70's. I still have some 40 years then. I've also had certain odd memory issues since I've been a kid. Such as trying to remember a person or place's name. Never could, but I can fairly easily remember long strings of numbers, and have a high, not perfect, photographic style memory.
Then why? I don't personally know, and probably can't afford the neuro-physicist who might be able to find out.
As for a psychiatrist? Likely they would either side with the manic depressive, or decide it's some sort of adult ADHD. And I'll admit, in a way it is some sort of adult ADHD. But I don't think taking drugs designed to "mellow" one out would solve a lethargic problem. Amphetamines on the hand might, but I'm not very big on drugs to begin with. Which is odd contradiction because of my personal politics, but that's a completely different subject.
Anyways, due to multiple factors currently in my life, including my weird sleeping schedule, I'm not sure if there ever is going to be a good answer to my problem. However my flatmate, with whom I discussed this recently, half joked he was going have me take ginsing and some other memory herbs and such. I think I might try them out.
As to the writing... well I'm back at work, so likely I'll sleep normally again for the rest of the week, and that means I'm back to writing, again.
For anyone just joining us, let's recap. Due in no small part to several nudges and comments over the last week, I had finally decided to make another concentrated push at writing again. Large or small I was going to set aside some time each day, give myself a deadline, and write... anything. So what happens after the first day? I run in to one of my not so unusual sleepless periods.
That is it was the weekend, I didn't have to work, and of course I couldn't sleep. Oh I still averaged 5 hours a day, it just that it came in dribs of 1-2 hours at a time. This of course causes me to be even more lethargic then my normal and thus any desire to, well do anything vanishes. I end up not cleaning, cooking, working on my house, or even playing a game. I basically veg all day long, trying to maybe become interested in something, tv, music, anything at all, and not succeeding.
Luckily this only happens maybe every other month or two, and is usually sparked because I'm overworked, over slept, and just not focused on anything. Others who I've confided in have put forward the theory that I might be a little manic depressive. The major flaw with this theory of course being I'm never in the manic phase. Plus when I'm lethargic I'm not depressed, just uninterested.
Is it some sort of early, early Alzheimer's? Doubtful, as I have only one grand parent with Alzheimer's, and they didn't begin to exhibit problems till their late 60's early 70's. I still have some 40 years then. I've also had certain odd memory issues since I've been a kid. Such as trying to remember a person or place's name. Never could, but I can fairly easily remember long strings of numbers, and have a high, not perfect, photographic style memory.
Then why? I don't personally know, and probably can't afford the neuro-physicist who might be able to find out.
As for a psychiatrist? Likely they would either side with the manic depressive, or decide it's some sort of adult ADHD. And I'll admit, in a way it is some sort of adult ADHD. But I don't think taking drugs designed to "mellow" one out would solve a lethargic problem. Amphetamines on the hand might, but I'm not very big on drugs to begin with. Which is odd contradiction because of my personal politics, but that's a completely different subject.
Anyways, due to multiple factors currently in my life, including my weird sleeping schedule, I'm not sure if there ever is going to be a good answer to my problem. However my flatmate, with whom I discussed this recently, half joked he was going have me take ginsing and some other memory herbs and such. I think I might try them out.
As to the writing... well I'm back at work, so likely I'll sleep normally again for the rest of the week, and that means I'm back to writing, again.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Confluences and Coincidences
I was talking with one of my coworkers just a short while ago, before getting out of work to head home and eventually to yet, when by some round about logic chain he asked why I wasn't writing. Well, actually he asked why I wasn't in the movie business, but in way that really meant he was asking why I wasn't pushing myself and my writing in to the lackluster from his point of view entertainment industry. When I then explained that I tend to be to much of a perfectionist, accounting for my currently two year drought in writing creativity, he again asked why.
After I had gone back to my desk, I pondered that question; why wasn't I trying to write. I know I've been stuck after having belted out 50,000+ words for a National Novel Writing Month challenge, and I was stuck because I really wanted to go back and edit the volume before trying to write the other half and finish it. But why hadn't I attempted any serious blogging, writing or anything else very creative in over two years? The real reason? I don't know. But at that moment I vowed, like I've done a handful of times in the last ten years, to try to do some daily writings. Thus I went back to my coworker, and challenged myself, with him as a witness, aka meddlesome friend who will razz me to no end if I don't finish what I start, to write something every day.
Then I hit a different sort of obstacle, what the heck was I going to write about?
After a few minutes of brainstorming I eventually decided to write a book review on a fairly good book I had read just the weak previously. I was going with this book, mostly because even though I've read two other books since, it was the only one to actually remain in my memory, which of course is a good thing. The problem was, that on the way home my mind began to drift as I attempted to scribe a good review.
What happened, was that I kept getting side tracked by a number of logic chains. First I recalled that the book I had read, by pure chance a major core of it's background had been referenced at least twice in different articles or events. Remarking on this short term coincidence, I then segued to a different logic chain, where upon I realized, I had been reminded, or prodded to a minor degree about writing as well this week. I also realized that I had been goaded enough that when my friend pushed the last button he finally put me over the tipping to do something about it. I also realized I had been nudged enough that any review I attempted to write, would probably head back in to remarking and talking about the various confluences and coincidences.
Thus on my first days sojurn in to writing, I've ended up writing this, one long "cat vacuum" of a post, about nothing more then the fact I've been prodded to write, and am going to attempt to write every day, all without trying to promise again what I haven't been able to do in the last two years.
Then again, at least I'm writing...
After I had gone back to my desk, I pondered that question; why wasn't I trying to write. I know I've been stuck after having belted out 50,000+ words for a National Novel Writing Month challenge, and I was stuck because I really wanted to go back and edit the volume before trying to write the other half and finish it. But why hadn't I attempted any serious blogging, writing or anything else very creative in over two years? The real reason? I don't know. But at that moment I vowed, like I've done a handful of times in the last ten years, to try to do some daily writings. Thus I went back to my coworker, and challenged myself, with him as a witness, aka meddlesome friend who will razz me to no end if I don't finish what I start, to write something every day.
Then I hit a different sort of obstacle, what the heck was I going to write about?
After a few minutes of brainstorming I eventually decided to write a book review on a fairly good book I had read just the weak previously. I was going with this book, mostly because even though I've read two other books since, it was the only one to actually remain in my memory, which of course is a good thing. The problem was, that on the way home my mind began to drift as I attempted to scribe a good review.
What happened, was that I kept getting side tracked by a number of logic chains. First I recalled that the book I had read, by pure chance a major core of it's background had been referenced at least twice in different articles or events. Remarking on this short term coincidence, I then segued to a different logic chain, where upon I realized, I had been reminded, or prodded to a minor degree about writing as well this week. I also realized that I had been goaded enough that when my friend pushed the last button he finally put me over the tipping to do something about it. I also realized I had been nudged enough that any review I attempted to write, would probably head back in to remarking and talking about the various confluences and coincidences.
Thus on my first days sojurn in to writing, I've ended up writing this, one long "cat vacuum" of a post, about nothing more then the fact I've been prodded to write, and am going to attempt to write every day, all without trying to promise again what I haven't been able to do in the last two years.
Then again, at least I'm writing...
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Reboot Part Redux
A couple of months ago, I finally decided to look in to re-writing my home page, just to show that a) I'm still alive, and b) I can still web code. However while working on my project offline, I ran into some snags. As such, I again put it off. During this hiatus I was introduced to some nifty little programs to streamline my online reading habits. In the process, I was also finally clued in and up to date on whatever latest web innovation was going on. Much to my surprise, my original blog site was finally undergoing a major facelift. Since my new site hadn't been much active, I realized that I might want to at least put up something, or I might as well throw in the towel.
Since I didn't want to give up on writing, as you can plainly see, I've converted the new site over to the new Blogger and will be in the coming days, weeks, months or even years be trying to post and designing a new blogsite. Maybe even one that I'll finally be happy with. Till then though, write, read, and be merry, for tomorrow you might get writer's block.
Since I didn't want to give up on writing, as you can plainly see, I've converted the new site over to the new Blogger and will be in the coming days, weeks, months or even years be trying to post and designing a new blogsite. Maybe even one that I'll finally be happy with. Till then though, write, read, and be merry, for tomorrow you might get writer's block.
Friday, July 08, 2005
[TB] Today, We are all Londoners
If you have no idea what I'm about to write on, then you are more out of touch then even I am, and that's saying something. On June 7th, 2005, London was blighted, by the worst attack on it's very streets since World War II. 37 people were killed, and at least 700 wounded when four bombs in various subway carriages, and bus trolleys went off near simultaneously. The resulting explosions, at first thought to be a massive gas leaks, wrecked havoc on the London mass transit system. Not to long afterward, a little known Jihadist website Al-Qal'ah, made a claim to this atrocity and further warned all those who support the Iraq invansion are under threat now to, unless they pull their troops out, to paraphrase.
Being one least likely to jump on a global bandwagon, I debated briefly, whether to post a story about this at all. But then while reading BoingBoing, and RangelMD, I was struck with the above quote. The quote itself is a slight ripoff of something that was said after the Trade Center attack in New York, but in itself, is truth. When tragedy strikes, often as not, human beings find themselves even at incredible divide, suddenly united under one roof. They are reminded, ever so briefly, that all people, no matter their stature, no matter their wealth, race, descent, sex, or religion, can be killed by the slightest of whims, of people who really have no concern for life, no matter what their rhetoric.
And for the briefest of instances, we realize that this is one world, warts and all.
Being one least likely to jump on a global bandwagon, I debated briefly, whether to post a story about this at all. But then while reading BoingBoing, and RangelMD, I was struck with the above quote. The quote itself is a slight ripoff of something that was said after the Trade Center attack in New York, but in itself, is truth. When tragedy strikes, often as not, human beings find themselves even at incredible divide, suddenly united under one roof. They are reminded, ever so briefly, that all people, no matter their stature, no matter their wealth, race, descent, sex, or religion, can be killed by the slightest of whims, of people who really have no concern for life, no matter what their rhetoric.
And for the briefest of instances, we realize that this is one world, warts and all.
Friday, June 24, 2005
[TB] Work vs Blogging
One of the topics I bring up occasionaly is on the various interactions between work, and blogging. Basically in this day and age it has become so very easy to expound in a semi-public forum on such a wide ranging set of topics, that some blogs have become all about what we have to put up with everyday. That is, blogging has become the 21st century water cooler, where we can at no expense to ourselves gossip about the latest going on's of our officemates, our co-workers, and the successes and failures of our umbrella that is the company whom employs us. The downside to having such a marvelous new land to gossip and gripe in, is that it may be a little to public.
Like the old joke about the coworker whose very good at impersonating the boss, in a funny, and not so good way, who one day gets caught by said boss, writing in a blog can inherently be a dangerous medium for even the most average of grippers to easily get caught in. And unfortunately when you are displaying in such an open space the problems of a company and the people in it, it's almost inevitable that when discovered, the usual reward is to be fired. But when the news is dish, and your friends not quite as sympathetic, what are you going to do?
One early trend that seems to be most popular is to learn how to be both anonymous, and amphorous about what you are writing. You hide the details, bury the real names of everyone involved and try to keep the story intact while not giving away to those home-brewed detectives the who, what, and where that could get you spotted and exiled. This method of course has it's own drawbacks, as you have to bend backwards daily and you are constantly looking of your shoulder to make sure no one is watching you, watching them.
On the other hand you can do like me. Avoid the problem by not mentioning friends problems, company gossip, or even your neighbor's actions. Instead if you have to comment, make it insightful, not backstabbing, put out both sides, even if one is extreme, and is moderate. Above all, learn to have fun with it and not worry, because you know what? In the end life is like a box of choclates, sweet, messy, and fatening, but horribly delicous once you get done.
Like the old joke about the coworker whose very good at impersonating the boss, in a funny, and not so good way, who one day gets caught by said boss, writing in a blog can inherently be a dangerous medium for even the most average of grippers to easily get caught in. And unfortunately when you are displaying in such an open space the problems of a company and the people in it, it's almost inevitable that when discovered, the usual reward is to be fired. But when the news is dish, and your friends not quite as sympathetic, what are you going to do?
One early trend that seems to be most popular is to learn how to be both anonymous, and amphorous about what you are writing. You hide the details, bury the real names of everyone involved and try to keep the story intact while not giving away to those home-brewed detectives the who, what, and where that could get you spotted and exiled. This method of course has it's own drawbacks, as you have to bend backwards daily and you are constantly looking of your shoulder to make sure no one is watching you, watching them.
On the other hand you can do like me. Avoid the problem by not mentioning friends problems, company gossip, or even your neighbor's actions. Instead if you have to comment, make it insightful, not backstabbing, put out both sides, even if one is extreme, and is moderate. Above all, learn to have fun with it and not worry, because you know what? In the end life is like a box of choclates, sweet, messy, and fatening, but horribly delicous once you get done.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
[TB] I was gently reminded today,...
I was gently reminded today, that I hadn't posted in awhile. Awhile of course being two months. I don't have any really cool or good excuse for this, other then to say, I just didn't feel like it. Not in the, I'm lazy and couldn't think of anything to say, there is always something going on, even as something as inane as which movie sucked more "Bad(der) Santa", or "The Manchurian Candiate" (2004). More it was the didn't feel like it as in I just couldn't write.
My soul was willing, my brain was not. Or is that the reverse?
Basically I had slipped into this visual input/output mode where I couldn't write or express myself in cognitive ways. I could communicate, but I couldn't expound. I could see, taste, and smell, but I couldn't hear or speak right. I gobbled up seasons worth of TV shows for the first time in six months, cause they were short, flashy, and all visual. But I couldn't stand to get through 2 minutes of Cary Grant's "Bringing Up Baby".
My imagination had shut down, and in it's place was this vacant life-vamping thing. I didn't do anything important. I didn't do anything utterly exciting unless it was by accident or outside force. I did work on some sutff around the house, but there was no umph behind it. I had stopped being hyper, and I did not know, or really care why. I wasn't depressed, but I wasn't exuberant either. I was just. Unless you've been there, you wouldn't understand.
Then one day, about a week ago, it snapped. Something, even I don't know what, changed. Maybe it was the walking with 20,000 other people on a hot day, to support a cause that hadn't directly touched my life, but was important. Maybe it was the sudden snap from having trouble sleeping, to getting sleep when I wanted without problem. Or maybe something else entirely.
Whatever it was, the pilot light was lit, and I started thinking again. I started reading all my websites, heck I picked up a book and read it front to back in two days again, and I started communicating. So when I saw a new blog out there that really stoked the fires of creativity I realized, I had forgotten my own creation. Thus I'm writing here again today, and hopefully many days to come.
My soul was willing, my brain was not. Or is that the reverse?
Basically I had slipped into this visual input/output mode where I couldn't write or express myself in cognitive ways. I could communicate, but I couldn't expound. I could see, taste, and smell, but I couldn't hear or speak right. I gobbled up seasons worth of TV shows for the first time in six months, cause they were short, flashy, and all visual. But I couldn't stand to get through 2 minutes of Cary Grant's "Bringing Up Baby".
My imagination had shut down, and in it's place was this vacant life-vamping thing. I didn't do anything important. I didn't do anything utterly exciting unless it was by accident or outside force. I did work on some sutff around the house, but there was no umph behind it. I had stopped being hyper, and I did not know, or really care why. I wasn't depressed, but I wasn't exuberant either. I was just. Unless you've been there, you wouldn't understand.
Then one day, about a week ago, it snapped. Something, even I don't know what, changed. Maybe it was the walking with 20,000 other people on a hot day, to support a cause that hadn't directly touched my life, but was important. Maybe it was the sudden snap from having trouble sleeping, to getting sleep when I wanted without problem. Or maybe something else entirely.
Whatever it was, the pilot light was lit, and I started thinking again. I started reading all my websites, heck I picked up a book and read it front to back in two days again, and I started communicating. So when I saw a new blog out there that really stoked the fires of creativity I realized, I had forgotten my own creation. Thus I'm writing here again today, and hopefully many days to come.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
[TB] Reboot
Due to various stuff going on, I'm trying to consolidate my blogs a little. I'm going to eliminate the one at Mindspring.com , keep the one at whtedrgn.blogs.com active as my main, while keeping this one at whtedrgn.blogspot.com as my backup and play toy for the time being. In the coming days hopefully I'll be able to rassle this blog around to look more like my main blog. From there it's an "I have no clue" as to which I'll stay with.
Ya'll cool with that?
Ya'll cool with that?
Sunday, November 30, 2003
Nanowrimo.org
I came, I brain stormed, I wrote
Today, the 30th of November, in the year of our lord 2003 anno domino, I completed my 50,000th word for the Nanowrimo.org contest/challenge. I did it in near marathon capability, as I finally made a sort of breakthrough. Last Monday I was still pedaling around, a little over 20,000 words behind, and only a week left. I then found the capability to start cranking out 3000 words a day, and finally tonight, from around 10:30pm till 8:00am I cranked out 6,500 words of pure mayhem.
Continue Reading "Nanowrimo.org" »»
Even more odd, is that my writing did improve as I went along. The first few chapters as I now look back are weak, yes. The first few chapters averaged at maybe 1,800 words a chapter. The final chapters, at a whopping 4,000 words a chapter (including the combined 11+12 at a mega 9,852 words). I learned to work my characters, how to come up with names, how to identify with them, how to describe and I have started to learn how to balance description with dialogue.
And yet, I'm still not done. Oh, I've finished the 50,082 words, passing the mark that was challenged. I now plan on taking a week off, letting my arm heal and my brain fill backup. I do not know if I'll ever sell this novel, but I will try to at least finish it. I will also leave the first 14 chapters online, and even update them as I edit to give you the reader a taste of the book. If by chance I sell it, we shall see what happens, and hope I can retain or have some say in the electronic rights.
But now, have fun reading the novella, and remember, after chapter 8 it does pick up a bit and get better.
You can read Thunderhead to the Storm's first 14 chapters here
Thursday, October 23, 2003
Nano Nano who?
Never let it be said, that the what one person thinks of, another person can also. In from a more memorable saying, "Great Minds Think Alike". Near the beginning of this blogging expierence, I told you the reader, that the may emphasis of this site would really be about learning how, and to write. Even if it's a short story, or an article about Elephant kidneys, it was all about writing everyday in order to train myself to write. Going back over what I have done, you could say that I've failed in the exact regard, though succeded in several key intentions. Still though, I need to write. So of course I'm zipping along on a wierd tangent and come across something that might just give me the kick in the pants to do what I trully want to do, and that's write.
It appears that a like minded group of people for the last five years has been challenging people to write, just for the sake of writing, and do what they keep saying that would do someday, just right now. Over at NaNoWriMo they are challenging people, to write 50,000 words in 30 days. In essence, if you enter the challenge, you have only from November 1st, at 12:00:01am till November 30th, at 11:59:59pm to write 50,000 words. The catch is, all you win is the satisfaction you wrote 50,000 words in 30 days and your name on their winner's list. On the upside, they don't edit or read your works, so it doesn't have to be perfect or magnificent or even sane; it just has to be 50,000 words. You could of course right the word triangle 50,000 times and win your name on the board, but what's that all about anyways? Up to this point, something like 3,000 people have won that same right in the last 4 years. So it's not about being special, it's all about doing something you said you were going to do.
Thus I, your blogger in resident, have decided to enter this challenge. I will write 50,000 in 30 days; that's 1,667 words a day. I will do so with hopefully a consistent story line, characters and such, and I will finish a novella. The catch is, while others have had nearly a year to plan a storyboard, characters, etc... I have just about 8 days at this point to collect together something from the scraps I've been writing over the last 12 years.
To recap: I'm entering a contest, with no prize another then self satisfaction, to write 50,000 words of some story in 30 days. I'm doing this on 8 days notice. I'm insane. And I'm going to go down in flames but having fun at the same time. The good news is of course my new night shift of doom, which gives me lots of freetime while restricting what I can and cannot do, thus allowing me hours of time to write something.
So do you dare to try also? Cheers
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Psychic Movie Reviewer 2003-10-16
One of the unfortunate side effects of the new hours and lapsing from my blogging, was that I missed two whole opening weekends, with enough movies to make me cheer, and equally enough to make me retch. As such, I'm just going to go over a few highlights.
First off, repeat after me... "You were right, and I was wrong". Although "The Fighting Temptations" appeared to be an aggresive opener, it quickly fell to the wayside, not even meeting the movie's budget in sales after three weeks. So I guess Friday night was an aberation, eh? Underworld still preformed admirably, making nearly double it's budget. Unfortunately, because the movie company wasn't allowed to aggressivly promote the film due to a lawsuit, it didn't quite reach buster status. Still though, expect at least one sequel. The three oscar quality films continue to keep pace, making money and showing audiences that they really are good. Unfortunately, due to current ban on Screener tapes, their chances of oscar(s) have just gotten slimmer
Meanwhile the Rock, continues to rock with "The Rundown", although I'm still betting it's score is all because of the villian that everyone loves to quote, and see dance (Christopher Walken). On the other hand, that computer game based piece of excretion, should be intombed in the "House of the Dead". Mind you, I love the computer game. I still plop quarters into it evertime I go to my favorite movie house, and usually wear my arm out, but this movie just bites. Speaking of bitting, "Intolerable Cruelty" is doing decently well for a movie I rated as poor, probably all because of the two sexy symbol stars, Zeta and Jones. I perdict a sharp drop off after this weekend. Meanwhile Denzel appears to have shrugged off of being the Rabbit from Alice in Wonderland for Halloween, as his movie "Out of Time" continues to plod along like a good little film.
Now Sparky, pay attention to that number 3 spot as it appears that "Good Boy" is living up to it's name and being a good treat for dog lovers and kids of whatever age. On the opposite hand, the movie for the adult kids just doesn't seem to want to roll over as Jack Black's "School of Rock" continues to allude my own predictions of failure.
Last but not least is the hands down winner for this last weekend, as "Kill Bill Vol. 1" soars past the competition. Unfortuantely, it would have done better had it not chopped itself in half and made us wait for Vol. 2. Some movies can "hack" having a two parter, some movies just can't get the bill. I guess that's all for this week, stay tuned friday for a look at a Legal-Thriller, a Horror, and two Oscars. Cheers
| Top Ten MOVIEs | WKG | YTD |
| 1. Kill Bill Vol. 1 | $22.1M | $22.1M |
| 2. School of Rock | $15.5M | $39.7M |
| 3. Good Boy | $13.1M | $13.1M |
| 4. Intolerable Cruelty | $12.5M | $12.4M |
| 5. Out of Time | $8.6M | $28.7M |
| 6. House of the Dead | $5.7M | $5.7M |
| 7. The Rundown | $5.2M | $40.3M |
| 8. Under the Tuscan Sun | $4.9M | $28.3M |
| 9. Secondhand Lions | $3.3M | $35.4M |
| 10. Lost in Translation | $2.8M | $18.1M |
| 11. Underworld | $2.3M | $48.8M |
| 12. The Fighting Temptations | $1.9M | $27.2M |
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
24 hours in a day
One O'clock and all's well! It's one am my time and for the first time in two weeks, I'm back to blogging again. Before I head off into the ponderance of life at one AM, let me at first at least try to apologize for the unremarked absence. Basically, shortly after my last post, I learned that TPTB (The Powers That Be) at my new job, had finally figured out where they were going to assign me, and the four others of my training class. It was a true red letter day, as we all could finally stop agonizing about what was to happen, and instead start the process of integrating into what we would make happen. I personally was quite baffled, as TPTB threw me a curve and assigned me to one of the hardest teams. Still though, I was happy. Then two days later I went from baffled to down right perplexed.
No, I wasn't let go, fired, put out, etc... Instead, after some last minute haggling, TPTB changed their mind and instead assigned me to a general team, on a 9 by 6 schedule. 9pm to 6am that is; Tues through Saturday. Let's set the record straight, I'm not a night owl. Yes I am a computer level techno weenie, but unlike my flatmate, and his friends, I'm not a night owl. For some reason, I've always liked the daytime, I just wish it started two hours later then it did. The closest I came to being a night owl was in college, where I sometimes stayed up for three days at a time. I've also previously worked a 12pm to 9pm shift before, still, I always was asleep by 2 or 3am, and then up inside of 6 hours.
Thus later, on the next weekend, I bit the bullet and began to adjust my sleep schedule, so that I wouldn't fall asleep at work. Now it is two weeks later and I'm pretty close to adjusted. Since Friday September 26th, I have yet to go to sleep before 7am, and by now, my body appears to have adjusted to sleeping from 8am-ish to 3pm-ish. On the downside, I was so preoccupied with becoming a vampire, that I cleanly forgot to make time for the blog. As such, I apologize.
On the upside, the new hours are so freakishly devoid of humanity, I will almost certainly be blogging more just to keep up my conversation skills. Cheers
No, I wasn't let go, fired, put out, etc... Instead, after some last minute haggling, TPTB changed their mind and instead assigned me to a general team, on a 9 by 6 schedule. 9pm to 6am that is; Tues through Saturday. Let's set the record straight, I'm not a night owl. Yes I am a computer level techno weenie, but unlike my flatmate, and his friends, I'm not a night owl. For some reason, I've always liked the daytime, I just wish it started two hours later then it did. The closest I came to being a night owl was in college, where I sometimes stayed up for three days at a time. I've also previously worked a 12pm to 9pm shift before, still, I always was asleep by 2 or 3am, and then up inside of 6 hours.
Thus later, on the next weekend, I bit the bullet and began to adjust my sleep schedule, so that I wouldn't fall asleep at work. Now it is two weeks later and I'm pretty close to adjusted. Since Friday September 26th, I have yet to go to sleep before 7am, and by now, my body appears to have adjusted to sleeping from 8am-ish to 3pm-ish. On the downside, I was so preoccupied with becoming a vampire, that I cleanly forgot to make time for the blog. As such, I apologize.
On the upside, the new hours are so freakishly devoid of humanity, I will almost certainly be blogging more just to keep up my conversation skills. Cheers
Friday, May 09, 2003
Psychic Movie Reviewer 2003-05-09
This weekend in movies, is like an eye of the hurricane. Caught dead square against two juggernaut "Summer Blockbusters", few movies dare to open this weekend, except one. In wide release we have in this corner, "Daddy Day Care". Rated PG, and classed as Comedy, "Daddy Day Care" is an Eddie Murphy film about a man who loses his professional job, feels out of sorts as his wife provides for the family, then decides to open up a neighborhood daycare in what he thinks will be a creampuff like job. Unfortunately, taking care of kids is nothing creampuff like, and neither is this movie.
Offhand without having seen the movie, and going by the trailers, this movie while certainly better then "The Adventures of Pluto Nash" will mostly likely fall short of Murphy's early more well like films. Of course this appears to be a trend with the aging comic, who seems to be devolving into a second childhood, with more and more movies pandering to a gross-out gag me with a spoon plot and acting. Almost makes one wonder if he's trully trying to follow in the footsteps of Jerry Lewis. Will it make money though is entirely questionable, and the answer? Yes. The movie is low budget enough that it'll spin out enough dollars to break even. Though please, for the love of god, stay away from any sequels.
RTI: 31%
Offhand without having seen the movie, and going by the trailers, this movie while certainly better then "The Adventures of Pluto Nash" will mostly likely fall short of Murphy's early more well like films. Of course this appears to be a trend with the aging comic, who seems to be devolving into a second childhood, with more and more movies pandering to a gross-out gag me with a spoon plot and acting. Almost makes one wonder if he's trully trying to follow in the footsteps of Jerry Lewis. Will it make money though is entirely questionable, and the answer? Yes. The movie is low budget enough that it'll spin out enough dollars to break even. Though please, for the love of god, stay away from any sequels.
RTI: 31%
Thursday, May 01, 2003
Surgery is a Powerful Word, Part 2
In only a few hours I will be going under the knife. A specialist in oral surgery and dental medicine will be cutting into the gumline just above my canine, in order to cut out a small cyst hanging onto the root of the tooth. Before you eep though let me explain a few things. Cysts are actually not very uncommon around teeth. Frequently they are caused by blood being cutoff from the tooth, and causing some organic decay. Root Canals are the usual treatment of such Cysts, and as evident by how common the procedure is, quite easy to fix.
In my case, the tooth in question has already had a root canal. Normally then, the dentist, would just retreat the tooth (do another root canal) and fix the problem. Unfortunately, because it was a canine, I had a post put inside the tooth during the last root canal, in order to stabilize it and keep from losing the tooth. Here's where the problem set in. Although a post can be removed and a root canal performed, my canine has been deemed to integrated into the post to risk removing it (it'd probably destroy the tooth). Instead the doctor will go in above the tooth, and perform a kind of reverse root canal. The procedure itself should take about 20-40 minutes, and isn't considered dangerous. However, in order to do it, the dentist will still have to cut into live flesh, and then stitch it close again, ie, it becomes Surgery.
For the non-layman, Surgery is a bogey-man kind of word. The average person does not cut into themselves deep enough to draw blood daily, nor does the average person tie flesh back together after-wards. Although Surgery is so common place these days, with all the corrective procedures available, and the wonderful world of plastic surgery to alter one's appearance, Surgery itself still holds a residual charge of emotion.
Most of this emotion stems from the association people have between surgery and pain. Coupled with the fact that people dread anything to do with changing their body, and that until this last century, surgery had a very high rate of death, and you've created a very highly perceived source of danger. On the other hand, a lot of it is just perceived notions of association.
Why is association so powerful? The human mind is a very powerful tool, most of revolving around memory. Association is a big tool that memory uses in order to link similar things together in order for a person to complete thoughts and ideas. Thus in order to assure that a person, doesn't devolve in repetition, association between thoughts takes place at a more base level motivator. Take for example a dog. Common four legged animal, it generally like to explore and be active. When it comes across another dog that is larger and more angry then it, one usually leaves with a couple of scratches vowing never to return. Ie, to the Dog, pain = Big Dog = don't go near that area or dog again. In humans, its roughly the same way, the more real pain is, the more a person wants to avoid it, ie Surgery. Oddly enough, because the mind can be so screwed up, sometimes this doesn't always prove out. Course it more often then not does, as evident by drug addiction and the like.
The end result? Although Surgery is a powerful emotion motivator, you have to realize that it's not all that bad. Frequently surgery is a needful tool to make sure you don't have a longer pain from something you refuse to treat. That is, get done with the sharper pain immediate, and spare the longer more nerve racking pain from occurring.
In my case, the tooth in question has already had a root canal. Normally then, the dentist, would just retreat the tooth (do another root canal) and fix the problem. Unfortunately, because it was a canine, I had a post put inside the tooth during the last root canal, in order to stabilize it and keep from losing the tooth. Here's where the problem set in. Although a post can be removed and a root canal performed, my canine has been deemed to integrated into the post to risk removing it (it'd probably destroy the tooth). Instead the doctor will go in above the tooth, and perform a kind of reverse root canal. The procedure itself should take about 20-40 minutes, and isn't considered dangerous. However, in order to do it, the dentist will still have to cut into live flesh, and then stitch it close again, ie, it becomes Surgery.
For the non-layman, Surgery is a bogey-man kind of word. The average person does not cut into themselves deep enough to draw blood daily, nor does the average person tie flesh back together after-wards. Although Surgery is so common place these days, with all the corrective procedures available, and the wonderful world of plastic surgery to alter one's appearance, Surgery itself still holds a residual charge of emotion.
Most of this emotion stems from the association people have between surgery and pain. Coupled with the fact that people dread anything to do with changing their body, and that until this last century, surgery had a very high rate of death, and you've created a very highly perceived source of danger. On the other hand, a lot of it is just perceived notions of association.
Why is association so powerful? The human mind is a very powerful tool, most of revolving around memory. Association is a big tool that memory uses in order to link similar things together in order for a person to complete thoughts and ideas. Thus in order to assure that a person, doesn't devolve in repetition, association between thoughts takes place at a more base level motivator. Take for example a dog. Common four legged animal, it generally like to explore and be active. When it comes across another dog that is larger and more angry then it, one usually leaves with a couple of scratches vowing never to return. Ie, to the Dog, pain = Big Dog = don't go near that area or dog again. In humans, its roughly the same way, the more real pain is, the more a person wants to avoid it, ie Surgery. Oddly enough, because the mind can be so screwed up, sometimes this doesn't always prove out. Course it more often then not does, as evident by drug addiction and the like.
The end result? Although Surgery is a powerful emotion motivator, you have to realize that it's not all that bad. Frequently surgery is a needful tool to make sure you don't have a longer pain from something you refuse to treat. That is, get done with the sharper pain immediate, and spare the longer more nerve racking pain from occurring.
Yes, I Really Want my Work Interuppted
Have you heard the old adage, "Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile?" Well, according to AdAge, "Online advertising software vendor Unicast is introducing a new kind of Internet ad that doesn't just pop up over a portion of the browser but rather fills the entire screen of the computer user." An Ad that takes up the whole screen of your computer, for at least 15 seconds, when you click on a link between parts of a story? Can AD's get anymore intrusive?
What can I recall that is wrong about this type of ad, let me recount the ways.
First off, haven't these people been watching the huge customer service backlash on AOL over pop-up ADS?. [Unicast promotional materials suggest the new format will enable advertisers to reach their audiences "with the same impact" as TV.] Um, dude, ever wonder why Tivo's, fast forward buttons on VCR's, skip buttons on DVD's, etc, became so popular? In general, ads on Television are considered a nuisance, and most people have a tendency to channel surf past these commercials, or frankly use them for snack or bathroom breaks. Numbers wise, ads on television are barely break even propositions except that good research can properly target a correct audience and catch a fraction of their attentions. The web however is less homogenized and thus loses some of that target capability.
Besides a person's computer is theirs to control, not yours. Unlike with television, you do not have inherent control over the channel content. A computer desktop is made of a couple of dozen different channels, only one of which you might control at any given time, to control more means your are monopolizing a device, that is designed not to be monopolized. You should not be able to block someone from being able to do anything but look at your ad, even if it is just for 15 seconds. If you want to do that, direct your capability to something like an XBox.
Now if you want some good proof that what your suggesting is a really bad idea, go research college computer culture at MIT and NCSU from a decade ago. Both places had in place (and there are probably others), a rudimentary instant messaging program called Zephyrs. Zephyrs were the basis for AOL's IM, ICQ, and all the other IM programs on the market now. Zephyrs were an in-house computer to computer instant messenger. They did not save, nor store messages. You had to be logged in to use them, and they were easily direct-able by email address directions.
However, Zephyrs, unlike later IM programs, were an open ended GUI system based on Unix gui(s). As such, when a message came through, all it did was open a new window, and put the pre-formatted message in it, and put it up on a person's desktop. The problem was, that new users quickly figured out, that by either upping the font, or filling the message with lots of text, could make the window you receive so large, it'd block your entire screen and interrupt whatever you were doing. Intrusive, yes, very much so. These early screen cobbling messages quickly became known as Zephyr Bombs, or Zephyr Nukes, because as long as you had Zephyr program running, anyone who knew where you were, could interrupt your work.
Admittedly, these weren't ads, but instead were deliberate attacks on people through a less then option-able client. The point however is similar enough. People will not like having their screen taken over. Initially people won't care about it of course, but given time, such a drastic intrusion will have deterious effects on website advertisement as many seek out un-aded sites, or at the very least, smarter, less intrusive AD sites.
One further note for the brains behind this. Although you've already set it up so that the ad doesn't run until its fully loaded, think about modem users downloading 300k every time the click a new link. You are eating their bandwidth up as well, and causing them to lose time that they might just use to actually want to read about your product. Also note, that even if it doesn't run, by the current implementation your suggesting, it's still going to pause the link access, until its closed, so it's going to be longer then 15 seconds until a person can access that next link that your ad is locked to.
What can I recall that is wrong about this type of ad, let me recount the ways.
First off, haven't these people been watching the huge customer service backlash on AOL over pop-up ADS?. [Unicast promotional materials suggest the new format will enable advertisers to reach their audiences "with the same impact" as TV.] Um, dude, ever wonder why Tivo's, fast forward buttons on VCR's, skip buttons on DVD's, etc, became so popular? In general, ads on Television are considered a nuisance, and most people have a tendency to channel surf past these commercials, or frankly use them for snack or bathroom breaks. Numbers wise, ads on television are barely break even propositions except that good research can properly target a correct audience and catch a fraction of their attentions. The web however is less homogenized and thus loses some of that target capability.
Besides a person's computer is theirs to control, not yours. Unlike with television, you do not have inherent control over the channel content. A computer desktop is made of a couple of dozen different channels, only one of which you might control at any given time, to control more means your are monopolizing a device, that is designed not to be monopolized. You should not be able to block someone from being able to do anything but look at your ad, even if it is just for 15 seconds. If you want to do that, direct your capability to something like an XBox.
Now if you want some good proof that what your suggesting is a really bad idea, go research college computer culture at MIT and NCSU from a decade ago. Both places had in place (and there are probably others), a rudimentary instant messaging program called Zephyrs. Zephyrs were the basis for AOL's IM, ICQ, and all the other IM programs on the market now. Zephyrs were an in-house computer to computer instant messenger. They did not save, nor store messages. You had to be logged in to use them, and they were easily direct-able by email address directions.
However, Zephyrs, unlike later IM programs, were an open ended GUI system based on Unix gui(s). As such, when a message came through, all it did was open a new window, and put the pre-formatted message in it, and put it up on a person's desktop. The problem was, that new users quickly figured out, that by either upping the font, or filling the message with lots of text, could make the window you receive so large, it'd block your entire screen and interrupt whatever you were doing. Intrusive, yes, very much so. These early screen cobbling messages quickly became known as Zephyr Bombs, or Zephyr Nukes, because as long as you had Zephyr program running, anyone who knew where you were, could interrupt your work.
Admittedly, these weren't ads, but instead were deliberate attacks on people through a less then option-able client. The point however is similar enough. People will not like having their screen taken over. Initially people won't care about it of course, but given time, such a drastic intrusion will have deterious effects on website advertisement as many seek out un-aded sites, or at the very least, smarter, less intrusive AD sites.
One further note for the brains behind this. Although you've already set it up so that the ad doesn't run until its fully loaded, think about modem users downloading 300k every time the click a new link. You are eating their bandwidth up as well, and causing them to lose time that they might just use to actually want to read about your product. Also note, that even if it doesn't run, by the current implementation your suggesting, it's still going to pause the link access, until its closed, so it's going to be longer then 15 seconds until a person can access that next link that your ad is locked to.
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
[TB] Surgery is a Powerful Word
To someone not in the health care industry, Surgery is a kind of bogeyman word. Any mention of it, conjurs up all sorts of nasty preconceptions about whats going to happen. And frequently, what is just a minor procedure can completely be blown out of the water, by misconcieved notions and rumor.
Yesterday I had an appointment with a Dental specialist over a possible problem with a tooth that's being involved in a bridge. My normal dentist was worried about what an X-ray might or might not have shown and wanted me to visit the other, before proceeding on sealing up the bridge work, again. The specialist proceeded to check me out and pronounced that tooth fine. However he had found the problem that was causing the blip on the X-ray. It seems, that the fron tooth of the bridge had developed a small cyst at the root, and was causing some gum distortions.
Since the tooth in question had previously been root canalled, the normal procedure would to just retreat it with another root canal, clean out the cyst and use anti-biotics. In this case however, the tooth in question was fragile, and had a post inserted to shore it up. Because it was so fragile, the specialist deemed it ill advised to remove the post, which might destroy the tooth. Instead he advised a "minor surgical" procedure, where he'd cut into the gum's above the tooth, a do a kind of reverse root canal from the roots of the tooth on down, and then stitch the gumline back close.
The procedure itself is relatively straight forward, and will most likely be even less painfull then a root canal. However, since I'm not in the medicial profession, Surgery has always been something to dread and avoid. Admittedly I'm also ferverent about my teeth with all the problems I have with them, and thus have allready scheduled an apointment for the procedure, but the very thought of Surgery brought up this bogeyman spector.
Since it's late however, and it has been a long day, I'll leave you with this and touch back on the subject Friday. Why, are we, as a human race anthamine to the notion that cutting into the body in order to correct something that could otherwise not be reached or treated?
Yesterday I had an appointment with a Dental specialist over a possible problem with a tooth that's being involved in a bridge. My normal dentist was worried about what an X-ray might or might not have shown and wanted me to visit the other, before proceeding on sealing up the bridge work, again. The specialist proceeded to check me out and pronounced that tooth fine. However he had found the problem that was causing the blip on the X-ray. It seems, that the fron tooth of the bridge had developed a small cyst at the root, and was causing some gum distortions.
Since the tooth in question had previously been root canalled, the normal procedure would to just retreat it with another root canal, clean out the cyst and use anti-biotics. In this case however, the tooth in question was fragile, and had a post inserted to shore it up. Because it was so fragile, the specialist deemed it ill advised to remove the post, which might destroy the tooth. Instead he advised a "minor surgical" procedure, where he'd cut into the gum's above the tooth, a do a kind of reverse root canal from the roots of the tooth on down, and then stitch the gumline back close.
The procedure itself is relatively straight forward, and will most likely be even less painfull then a root canal. However, since I'm not in the medicial profession, Surgery has always been something to dread and avoid. Admittedly I'm also ferverent about my teeth with all the problems I have with them, and thus have allready scheduled an apointment for the procedure, but the very thought of Surgery brought up this bogeyman spector.
Since it's late however, and it has been a long day, I'll leave you with this and touch back on the subject Friday. Why, are we, as a human race anthamine to the notion that cutting into the body in order to correct something that could otherwise not be reached or treated?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)