Failure to be relentless is permission to be forgotten.

That is all.

Apprenticeships

This is a topic that I started pondering about when in college. Specifically, I was sitting in freshman chemistry, learning how to fall asleep in class, wondering what the hell I was doing. College tuition isn't cheap. I'll be paying off my loans through 2024, and that's the part that I didn't have to pay right away. My folks were kind enough to forward all college related bills to me so that I got to appreciate (and pay) how expensive the curriculum was. Yet, I'm sitting through a class where material could not be presented any more dryly. Long, wordy powerpoint presentations in a dark lecture hall at 8 am do not an alert student make. I sometimes wondered if the professor snuck out halfway once all the students had fallen asleep for a smoke. Unfortunately, I could not stay awake long enough to test the theory.
I took the class because it was part of a required curriculum of courses that I had to pass if I wanted my degree. I took lots of classes like that. Some of them, like WW2 history, were very interesting to me, but ultimately have little impact on what I do as an occupation now. I would even go so far as to say that I learned more at the job I held in college than I did the courses I took to properly prepare me for a job as a mechanical engineer. The courses were just butter for the degree, and once done I wash my hands, burn my notes, and forget anything I might have accidentally learned. Once I started working, that's when I started learning. A more experienced engineer took me under his wing, and started showing me the ways of the engineering world. Project to project, mentor to mentor, I've continued to learn and accrue more 'real' knowledge. It's stuff that my professors couldn't really teach me as most of them had never left academia (This, non-readers, is possibly a reason for the previous entry regarding the Smithsonian Paradox).
What has happened to the concept of the apprenticeship? They've replaced it with internships and Co-ops, which are really just afterthoughts crammed into a now convoluted education system that seeks, though sadly fails, to surpass it. Apprentices figured out what they wanted to do, started learning at a young age by working in the industry under one or more mentors, and soon they were off on their own. Young grownups. Admittedly, some mentors were better than others, which is perhaps why the education system tried to move in and standardize everything. How ironic, it is then, that colleges offering the same degree vary so much in tuition. I'll not lie, I did not go to an ivy because I thought it would offer me a somehow better, richer experience. I went there to put the name on my resume. I never harbored thoughts that it would make me better. Truth be told, I'm envious of those that I work with who went to state schools because their bills are likely smaller, their college lives likely less hellish, but they're doing just as well as me. Doesn't the pain count for something!?! I bet it counted for apprentices.
Anyhow, yeah, chemistry sucks.

Money abstraction

50 years ago, When a farmhand completed a long day after a long week, the farmer tended to roll out a wad of cash and paid down the line what each one had accomplished. The pay was a direct measure of the week's worth of work. Those that worked the hardest got paid the best. Imagine if they didn't get paid in cash. Imagine they got their cash deposited directly to a checking account in their name. At the end of a long day, they went into town and checked the ATM to see how much they were worth. They never actually hold the cash. They just see it on the screen.
I just got off the phone with a man I've never met to discuss a transaction measuring in the tens of thousands of dollars. Not just anybody's ten's of thousands of dollars, but potentially my ten's of thousands of dollars. And yet, this doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm contemplating borrowing against the value of my home to pay off a car and consolidate some debt under a lower interest rate and whose interest is tax deductible. The guy likes it because I'm paying his company instead of somebody else's, and I like it because I'm paying less overall. But shouldn't a sum like 10 or 20 thousand dollars at least make my hair stand on end?
When I was little, I received a weekly allowance of $2.50 / week. For that I had to take out the trash twice a week and clean the toilets every Thursday. Over time the minimum wage creeped up (as did my responsibilities) to a whopping $5 / week. I got paid in cash, as it didn't make sense to write a check for $5, and my folks were paying me under the table. There was no contract, no formal written notice of wages in exchange for labor. I remember getting my $5 and stuffing it into a wallet that tended to have several, but never very many $5 bills. Sometimes I would trade in 4 for a $20, but that reduced the thickness of the cash and that never felt good, so I tended to stick with $5's when possible.
I would often save up for several months and then trade in those $5's for a lego kit or videogame, and I was always enjoyed those things as I'd worked so hard to get them. I remember getting one Lego kit that I'd seen in the store for months. When I finally had enough money, my folks drove me to Toys R Us to pick it up. I got the last one in the store. It'd been discontinued. Earlier that month I'd been tempted to buy some candy with some friends but opted out. If I had I wouldn't have gotten the toy before they pulled it from the shelves to set for the next big thing. Frugal behavior never tasted so good!
But.... something happened. I started to make more money. A guy with places to be and things to do (like write blogs no one reads :)) sadly cannot live on $5 a week, and my skills warranted a higher rate of pay. I entered the life of a teenager and began requisite teenager jobs. For the first time, I made enough to warrant getting paid in checks. This necessitated a checking account (cool! very grown-up I though). And once a month I got a statement allowing me to see how much was in there. I even got a debit card allowing me to buy things without even using cash. It made spending terribly convenient (those clever bastards!)
Nowadays, I have direct deposit with automatic billpay. I go to work for 40+ hours a week, do my thing, and every two weeks another chunk of change gets dropped in my account. It's there for about 3 days before the next round of bills to be paid causes the digits to drop back down again. It's a heart beating to the rhythm of commerce.
The problem is I find it harder and harder to comprehend the real value of a dollar. I almost never carry cash as I tend to loan it out, never keeping track closely enough to expect it returned. Everything is paid in plastic, and I download my net worth into Quicken 4 times a month to make sure balances are trending up and expenses are trending down or flat. It's not about value anymore. It's a math game we all play to make small numbers big. It makes it easier to talk about tens of thousands of dollars with strangers you'll never really meet. Hell some people talk about hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars with strangers. They trust them to manage their large numbers to make them even bigger. How often does Tom Hanks look at his checking balance? When he pulls out a card to buy lunch, does he even think about how much the sandwich costs? How much is a dollar worth to him? How much is it worth to me? How much will it be worth to me in 10 years? The fact is, it won't. It'll be part of a bigger number hopefully. But will I be able to teach my children the value of a dollar if I've forgotten it myself?

The Smithsonian Paradox

I have a feeling this will be a disclaimer-rific essay.
Many years ago someone once told me that to spend 30 seconds at every exhibit in the Smithsonian would take longer than a person lives. In effect, if you started as a child, you could live your entire life looking at things in the Smithsonian, and not finish it before you die. That's all well and good, but that got me thinking about what if someone actually did that. At the end of their life, they would know a great deal and have nothing to show for it.
At what point does learning cease to be practical?
In what I perceive to be a popular movement nowadays (1 disclaimer), there is an effort to attack 'common sense' concepts with new ideas. A great example of this is the book 'Freakonomics' which details similarities between crack dealing and McDonalds management layouts, or a potential correlation between Roe vs. Wade and the drop in the crime in the early 1990's. It hinges upon people from different disciplines coming together and applying what they know to scenarios outside their expertise and finding commonalities.
Another example comes from 'Blink', where Gladwell describes the meeting of NY stock exchange money managers and 3-4 star army generals. Apparently one guy had a mixer and invited the two groups, and they got along well, merging discussions of military strategy and rapid decision-making on the trading floor.
I enjoy reading these books and find them very enlightening. I'm working on one right now that parallels Navy Seal teamwork into better business models for project management. But all of this hinges on me actually being able to put this stuff to good use. At what point do I put the book down because it is of no practical use for me? At what point is edification not worth my time, at what point is it a waste of my time?
I'm a big Godzilla fan, as evidenced by the picture of airflow around a Godzilla in a wind tunnel. I can probably recite all of the enemies he has faced in under a minute. I can detail how many times a given enemy has appeared in different movies, and cite style changes from movie to movie. I have gathered this knowledge, spent time and money in so doing, all the while knowing that it serves absolutely no practical purpose. The collectibles have a certain monetary value, but they will not appreciate like a CD might. This knowledge will not improve my odds at a job interview, nor was it of any use when I was dating, as my wife will attest. All in all, it's amazing she didn't run out of my apartment screaming the first time she saw my shelves of snarling Japanese vinyl.
In the morning I often hear sports statistics being quoted over the radio. This is one much closer to many of my non-readers. I'll hear many conversations at work about baseball teams, football teams, particular pitchers, hitters, quarterbacks, linebackers, centers, etc. "Sure that guys 3-0 for the last three games, but that doesn't mean anything!" "Doesn't mean anything, how can you say that?!" "The next game is in a dome, we all know that throws him off." "That's just a rumor." etc, etc etc etc. Not to knock sports enthusiasts (2 disclaimers), but this information serves only to fill the quiet spots when people might wish to think, or pursue other topics in greater detail. Unless you are gambling or a player yourself, it is effectively useless.
How much time do we spend gathering knowledge that is useless to us, and why? Do we acknowledge its uselessness and gather it instead hoping to make one of those bizarre connections and write a popular book about it? Does the marine biologist who loves waffles hope to someday make that mysterious link between wafflemaking and algae blooms? Does the computer forensic expert/car enthusiast hope to understand why Corvette thieves prefer the classic Mac OS over OSX or Windows?
I can appreciate an 88 year old woman going back to school to get an accounting degree (3 disclaimers!), but I have to stop and ask why she feels that's the best use of her time.

Layers of decadence

My health teacher in high school lived by the motto: "I want what I have." Simply put, be happy with what you've got. Noble words, but perhaps a bit too idealistic to be put into practice. Everybody wants more. You want the latest car, the latest ipod, the latest gadget, the latest dress, to go see the latest movie, the latest video game, the latest hobby, the latest comic book, the latest New York Times bestseller, the latest diet, the latest exercise machine, the latest computer, the latest piece of furniture you never needed before but now can never live without.

It is a glut of consumerism, and we should all be ashamed. After all, there are starving people in Kenya who want nothing more than food and shelter. But wait, you mean they want more than they have?

Admittedly, those people in Kenya have nothing, so its hard to fault them for wanting more, but that begs the question of what is acceptable. We all strive to increase our net value, be it in material ownership, available skill sets, or as an intellectual resource. I've interacted with the upper, middle, and lower classes of the US. I've been to the slums of Mexico and the factories of China. I've stayed at the 'camp', a 7 bedroom resort built in the middle of nowhere with an industrial grade stove, 2 laundry rooms, 5 bathrooms, a small theater, a garage with 2 bedroom apartment overhead, a boathouse, and a massive generator to power it all belonging to a family that uses that as a weekend getaway. I would be lying to myself if I said I didn't want to have the freedom of that much luxury (assuming I don't have to clean it).

Imagine the class system, as defined by our net worth, as layers of a cake. When you're in a layer, you interact primarily with the layers just above and below you. Occasionally you get insight to what's way at the top, and what's way at the bottom. You imagine what it would be like to be at the top, but at the same time thank yourself that you're not at the bottom. But where should you, and everyone else belong as a minimum? Given that you only really know the layer that you're now in, and you're not completely miserable, that seems reasonable. But, at the same time, that next layer up would be a pretty nice place to be. So you want more than what you have, and you're a bad person right? What does that mean?

For the single mom working 3 full time jobs and a car that's always on the brink of falling apart, it's a stable partner or at the very least more income to afford a bit more time to spend with the kids. For the renter, its the desire to own a home. For the 16 year old, its the desire to have one's own car and gain independence. For the collector, its to find that last rare piece that'll make one's collection complete. For the gamer, its the latest console or game.

You can chide the gamer plunking down yet another $400-$600 on gaming hardware when his last console still works and there are plenty of games on it that he hasn't played. But can you chide the renter for wanting his or her own house? What allows you to see one's desires as frivolous and another's as reasonable/warranted?

At this point some might quote Mazlow's hierarchy of needs for self actualization. In it, you can reason that one needs things like shelter, food, water, social interaction, etc, all culminating in a wonderful self actualization at the top. That's great and all, but it doesn't apply to all cultures. The Amish place a higher priority on the community than they do the individual. Maybe they're not becoming self-actualized, but they seem plenty happy and have been getting along quite nicely for several hundred years. If not self actualization, where is the justification for wanting anything other than food and water? Shelter is nice, especially when the weather turns hostile. But need it be owned, or is rented acceptable?

For a long time my wife and I've wanted a house. We saved our pennies for a sufficient downpayment and now we're saving our pennies to meet the monthly mortgage payments. My wife went back to school and we got a second car to support our different schedules. Is it wrong to want these things? Is it wrong to desire a promotion or raise. Is it wrong to want to upgrade one's home, get a higher education degree, or get a degree at all?

What is the standard that we all should strive for? Once we get there, do we stop and proceed to help those behind us catch up? If we were noble we might do that. It'd be great, we all reach the same layer of decadence and have a great party once we're there. All we have to do is agree on which layer that is...

Transformers

Caution non-readers, there are a couple of spoilers.

At long last, I have seen this movie. Up until this point, I'd avoided reviews, trailers, general commentary, etc. regarding this movie. Most of the people I work with have no interest as transformers is post-generation for them. I wanted to see it when it came out, but I was in China. My one night free in Hong Kong I tried to see it, but they didn't have it yet. We've been incredibly busy during the weekends and weeknights dealing with some transitions that, I must admit, took precedence over going to see a movie. Plus, Julie wasn't that interested in a movie about giant robots, so it was hard to lay out some time.
I'd tried to take some time off work to see it, but the schedule never worked out quite right. By now it was becoming a running gag that I'd never see this damn movie! But at last, August 6th, at 12:20 pm, I scarfed down my lunch and ran to the movie theater.
AND IT WAS WORTH IT!!!

Anyone who knows me well is aware of my love for Godzilla. Anyone who has been to my house has seen the custom built shelves containing my not insignificant collection of Godzilla collectibles, including a cigarette lighter, and a toilet paper dispenser. But closer inspection (like that'll ever happen!) will reveal a transformer also resides on those shelves. It's Jazz, as a Pontiac Solstice, residing between the toilet paper dispenser and a box of tissue. What? I have sinus issues!

Transformers played second fiddle to Godzilla, but only just barely. They were the toys I played to death, the few that my parents could afford. What they couldn't I'd build out of legos. Unfortunately, those didn't transform quite as easily. I'd basically have to take it apart and rebuild it as a car. Eventually I gave that up and built a robot and a car and would just switch them when I wanted them to transform. At one point I was sick and my parents rented for me the original Transformers movie. I watched it for 12 hours straight. The next day I started to watch for another 12 hours when my parents finally took it away from me.

On the one hand, Transformers represent a battle between angels and demons. Those that are benevolent and fight for the weak simply because it is the right thing to do. They face off against those that would lie, cheat, deceive if you will, and prey upon those weaknesses to greater empower themselves. Optimus Prime is the archangel Michael facing off against Lucifer (Megatron), arguably a more powerful creature but Prime fights nonetheless.
On the other hand, it's robots that transform in cars, helicopters, tanks, trucks, jets, and all kinds of cool stuff. Some of you may be saying, 'yeah, but a soda machine? What angel in the pantheon is represented by the soda machine?' Touche.

I'd not realized the extent of the Transformers influence until this day. The first time I heard Optimus Prime speak, I actually teared up. Thank goodness Peter Cullen reprised the voice from the TV series. That, in and of itself, made the movie for me. With all its epic scope, they still managed to have plenty of fun, and of course some tragedy. I'll admit it was all I could do to not cry when Jazz died. If I had a complaint to level against the movie it is that they did not do justice to Jazz. Originally appearing as a Porsche, he was always able to remain calm despite the chaos around him or how badly the odds stacked up against him. He faced Megatron, a robot more than twice his size. Alas, it was not to be. He is my favorite autobot, and I will miss him.

Ryan and Becca

First off, many congratulations to Ryan and Becca. Everyone has said it, but you've truly begun a new life together, and I wish the best for you both. It would take many pages to enumerate the many advantages, both subtle and obvious that committing myself to Julie has done for me. To date, no drawbacks have manifest either. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough, but I'm happy, and I feel very confident that you two will be as well.

The wedding led to an interesting conversation between my wife and myself. Nothing like two friends going through a life altering event for you to reflect on some aspects of your own life. Here's a VERY hypothetical that was fun to play out. Let's say some other girl had an interest in me. She liked me for who I am and wanted to be more than just friends, perhaps even to try to steal me away (like I said, VERY hypothetical). But the fact is, Julie and I have been married for 3 years. Even in that short amount of time, we have both changed drastically to better complement each other. Most, if not all, of the aspects that some other girl might find of interest in me is due in no small part to who I'm with. If I left Julie, I would lose the very influence that caused me to have the behaviors this other girl would like about me. Quite the fun Catch-22. You've also got the violation of trust issue, and a whole heap of other things that just makes the entire scenario impractical. Needless to say, Julie and I are in it for the long haul. It's best for us and the rest of the world.

To say that you will change in a relationship is very true. If it's a close relationship, I think change is far too weak a descriptor. Malcolm Gladwell details this briefly in one of his books. When a person is single, they have to manage every facet of their lives and understand details about anything and everything that could effect them. You must have full understanding about your finances, nutrition, work life, social life, quiet time, etc. When you entire into a full fledged relationship, you get the oppportunity to split those things up. Divide and conquer. Julie has some insight into the finances, but I'm the one that balances the checkbook each week. She's not concerned about what percentage of our spending is going towards household goods and what percentage is going towards dining unless I notice that we're straying from the budget we'd set for ourselves. Conversely, Julie handles planning out meals and preparing them, which is good, because she's a much better cook than I. We both have insight into everything, but not the level of detail that's needed than if we're single. As such, we've got more free time as we're not busy managing absolutely every aspect of our lives.

Nuts, can't come up with a pithy closing line.

I spoke to soon.

Many things, mostly good. More to come later perhaps. For now, must hurry!

Time flies

Events back in March started a chain reaction of events that has only recently begun to subside allowing the concept of free time to enter my thoughts. In fact, I don't have free time, but everyone needs a break now and then.

While in China the judgement processing on the home foreclosure whose auction we'd won finally cleared, thus allowing us to finally close on the house. This pushed our schedule up as we'd been planning to not close until April and now had to find some homeowner's insurance fast. I must admit, it's fun to call up insurance folks who ask you to come in and fill out some paperwork and tell them: "I'm sorry, I can't at the moment as I'm on the other side of the planet, how about you email it to me instead."

The trip to china was eventful, complete with getting sick the night before I flew out, which I'll save for a more disgustingly graphic post at some point later. We got back, closed on the house, moved into the house, proceeded to finish painting, purging old broken appliances, buying swank new appliances and getting them delivered, cleaned, scrubbed, replaced 2 toilets (1 completely on my own!), learned the new area, and finally ran out of energy and money to continue renovations.

During this time, the project at work took a radical shift in direction which required a lot of attention that I didn't necessarily have. Fortunately, they brought in someone with a lot more experience to help me out and between the two of us we managed to keep it together and on schedule.

Julie has started her garden and I've finally mowed my own lawn for the first and second time. The finances have started to stabilize and we have a better understanding of what we're up against regarding this mortgage thing. Our cats continue their dichotomy of peace and chaos, and I managed to go camping for memorial day. Huzzah! I think the world is once again downshifting into a manageable pace!

What does your brain see?

What does your brain see?

Something that’s bothered me for quite a while, and apparently bothers others too is the issue of color perception. One night I had a dream where everything was viewed through a photonegative. All colors were the opposite of what they were supposed to be. The sky was orange, plants were yellow, and only I seemed to notice. Is it possible that the colors we see differ from other people? Perhaps what I see as green you would see as yellow. The thing is, you were trained that the color is green and have always grown up knowing it is green. To see something through someone else’s eyes could completely throw us off, as they’re colors are all wrong in our perception.

Another thing that would be interesting would be if you could take one eyeball out of its socket, pull it around and point it into the other eye. You are effectively looking into yourself. How would the brain interpret that? Would you go nuts, your brain explode? Would you get dizzy and throw up? Well, you’d probably throw up at the prospect of pulling out your eyeball, so it’d be hard to know what really caused it.

But enough vomit talk. It's hitting too close to home right now. Stupid food poisoning.

Database interfaces

Database interfaces continue to prove an enigma to me. I’ve tried to work with Access, MySql, along with a couple others whose names I don’t remember or have since blocked out of my mind. They’re wretched to setup, harder still to change, and seem to specialize in one of two categories:

Those that are easy to put information in.

Those that are easy to get information out.

Wikipedia is a great example of a database that’s easy to get information in. Bugzilla is another one. People who need to get information into a system love these types of systems. You freehand in information and do not require any particular type of structure. They’re very approachable, and great when you wish to amass information from a variety of sources very quickly.

But have you ever tried to compare two articles?

Let’s say you want to know the name of Franklin D Roosevelt’s dog. In wikipedia, you can probably find such a thing, but you can’t search for it directly. You have to search for Roosevelt, and then cull through the various pages that reference him to see if they mention his dog. You can add a string modifier to look for dog, which will reduce the time, but you still have to scan through the article to see if the information is relevant. Inconvenient, but not a show stopper.

But what if you wanted to compare articles referencing Roosevelt’s dog? What if you wanted to find out the context of someone’s life that an author would reference a famous man’s dog? There is no culling of data to gleam some greater insight. There is only an upchuck of that information that has already been deposited.

Now, on the opposite end of the spectrum, more business oriented databases like Access exist. My former employer used Access to keep track of clients, inventory, and various product models, as well as employee records. These systems require a lot of forethought. One must first consider Exactly what types of information you’re going to need to enter. For a product that you sell, you could include information like:

Sale price, sources of goods, prices your vendors charge, prices you sell for, etc. This is all well and good. Often someone who is entering information into the database needs a certain level of training so that they don’t enter numbers into a cell that requires text. However, you can design custom search strings to compare similar pieces of information. If you want to compare the prices of your different products, or look at what goods are the most expensive and the most cheap, you can do this fairly quickly and effortlessly.

But, if a year into the business you decide it’s time to start considering multiple vendors for a particular good you need, something you hadn’t thought of originally, your database needs a reworking to support all that. Cells have to be added, new information has to be entered. New queries have to be created, and some old ones have to be changed as they may not work anymore.

With respect to flying

I've said this before and I'll state it again. When on a long flight, give the person in the middle both armrests.
The window person has the few and a wall to lean against when napping. The aisle person can both stretch out and have easy access to the bathroom without imposing on others. The ONLY thing a middle seat person can possibly get is both armrests. When you have to sit there for over 16 hours, you really need both armrests.
This will be repeated as often as necessary until it catches on. Or, at least until I don't have to sit in the middle anymore.

Philosophy on technology and robots

I first developed this stance about 3 months before I started working at my current job. At the time, I was trying to understand how a cell phone made my life better.

Ideally the purpose of technology is to simplify our lives. However, most technologies only serve to further complicate everything we try to do by adding more and more layers of steps and processes. The exception to this is robots. Robots like the Roomba serve to fully free us of daily responsibilities and allow us to pursue other goals. The key lies in the automation that incorporates the technology.

Currently we live in a world with 1st and 3rd world countries. The 1st world nations further scientific development and technological achievement, while the 3rd world nations provide us with baser needs such as food and low cost labor. Ideally, 3rd world nations need to be brought up to the level of 1st world nations. But, before that can be realized, the baser needs that 3rd world nations provide must have a suitable replacement. This can perhaps be best realized through automation.

There is much more I can post on theories regarding automation, but it's late. Goodnight non-readers.

Math - Old school style

I'd never really thought about it, but someone pointed out to me recently that the Romans really did have to be able to multiply using their number system, regardless of the lack of zeros it offered. Just like we memorize up to 12x12, they had to memorize what letter combinations yielded what, and from that perform long multiplication. Oy!
It is explained in greater detail here. Read on and be amazed! Or don't and be normal.

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/database/QQ.09.98/jenkinson1.html

Red Queen

Did you ever stumble across something and find it both nothing like what you were looking for and yet very interesting?
Look up 'Red Queen' in Wikipedia. I was trying to find it if it was another name for Mary, Queen of Scotts. Instead, I find an article discussing the theory of the evolutionary arms race and the advantages of sexual reproduction over asexual reproduction. This is about a month after reading an article on the fact that some scientists have created technologies that essentially allow a woman to reproduce asexually (why, and who's willing to fund stuff like this?). Plus I wonder if this is the principle upon which the game Spore is designed, where your competitors develop specializations to compete with your own specializations.
As a race, it strikes me that humans have specialized via different cultures that emphasize affinity towards a given skill. As a stereotype, Russians are very good at math and chess and other logics. Indians are very good at programming, and the Japanese at precision, repeatability and quality. Where does that place Americans? Are we good 'out of the box' thinkers? If so, and if that theory applies to this situation, does that preclude other nations from developing blue sky thinking qualities because they evolve to compete by specializing in something else?

I posed these questions to a couple of friends with whom I feel I can ask these things. They came back with:

Isn't the stereotype (real or not) cultural-based also? How much affect on the development of those specialties did the local resources have?

To which I replied:

A question for a question: How many of these stereotypes developed post world war 2, when the cultures began to shift with respect to the global nation? No longer was there the desire to conquer, but to distinguish. I would suggest that pressures of the outside world shaped perceptions of that culture as much as, if not more than, local resources.

The topic is on going.

Funny story

In an effort to come to terms with my being an 'adult', I've attempted to take a more handyman role. I've got a background basic tools, internet access, and enough small problems around me that I often feel up to the task of at least one thing. I also have the advantage of renting at the moment, so serious issues that might arise can be dealt with by calling in the landlord. Admittedly he can take a while to get back to you, but that's an 'adult' risk right?
My first task involved replacing a classic mercury based thermostat with an electronic one where you can preprogram in temperatures for different days and times. This was a complete success.
Next, I replaced the faucet in the sink as one of the handles had gotten broken off. This, also, was a complete success.
By this point I'd begun to ride high on these successes. Perhaps I am an adult after all.
Then came the shower.
Our shower has two problems with it. 1) The hot and cold on the single dial are reversed, so hot water comes out first instead of cold, contrary to both the label and showers in general and 2) it occasionally has a slow leak. We don't pay for our water, so a slow leak wouldn't bother me except for the fact that we do pay to heat the water. Each drip felt like a penny falling down the drain.
At one point my in-laws come for a visit. We, of course, warn them about the shower so they don't have to experience quite the learning curve we did. Towards the end of the trip, my father in-law points out that fixing a problem like this is often quite easy. One can remove the handle with a single screw, and hidden behind it is a dial one turns 180 degrees to reverse the hot and cold feeds, restoring it to the way it should be. This sounds simple enough, so I took it under advisement.
About 3 weeks later, I actually found myself bored in the apartment. My wife was at her Spanish class and I began to hear the dripping again. Thus began my attempt at a hat trick.
The handle came off easily enough, but the dial was not to be found. So, I naturally venture online for some guidance. Sure enough, a handyman site comments that sometimes these showers have a second cap with a little screw between you and the dial, after the handle comes off. With that knowledge in hand, I return to my task, neglecting to notice that I'm on page 2 of the instructions.
Page 1 mentions the importance of first turning off the water.
As I begin to remove the screw, a small trickle of water beads down my hand. I think nothing of it, rationalizing that maybe some water was stuck in pipe between the tub faucet and shower head. Continuing to untwist the screw the water continues to trickle out, but it's so small it's hardly noticeable.
Then I get the screw out.

boom.


Within about a tenth of a second I am completely soaked. The blast of the water has nearly knocked me over and I quickly jump out of the tub. This now geyser of fluid is ejecting what seems like a shower's worth of water 4 times a second, and all through that tiny hole. What's more, it's not spraying it into the tub. We have a fiberglass shower stall with a curved back. The water is hitting that back, slaloming out of the shower, down the bathroom door and onto the floor.
I'll admit, I was a little awed by the sheer volume of water that could be pumped through such a tiny hole. I was tempted to ponder the philosophical meaning of such a thing, but this was no metaphor, and I had to get the damn screw back into it's little hole. Alas, the force of the water made that rather difficult. Plus, if you will recall, it defaults to hot water.
Several moments later, after a multitude of burns and a complete lack of success trying to re-block the water with my little screw, I opt for a new tack. Mostly I adjust the shower curtains to stop the water from shooting out of the tub and throw down all the towels to soak up what water that has begun to pool there. I then sit down for a moment to clear my head and consider my options.
At this point, I've got about 20 minutes before my wife gets back from class and has a bit of a nervous attack, mostly directed at me, for doing something so stupid. I could try to call the landlord, but it'd take me at least 20 minutes to find his number, assuming he'll answer, and assuming he'll get over here, it's safe to say that option will result in several hours of waiting, which would probably drain several great lakes through this tiny hole.
Finally, it dawns on me that I can, if nothing else, use the original handle to twist the water flow over from hot to cold. That way, while I'm still fighting the pressure to get the screw in, at least I'm not scalding myself.
4 tries later and some more swearing, I'm able to twist the knob. This does two wonderful things 1) The water does indeed go from hot to cold and 2) water now flows out the tub faucet. Suddenly the flow out the tiny hole drops to nothing. I race to put the screw back in and reassemble the entire fixture. I then mop up what water remains on the floor and gather up the soaked towels. This done, I collapse into my chair as I hear the front door open. The wife comes in to see me completely exhausted and soaked.
We've opted to live with our hot and cold being reversed. We're moving soon anyway.

Airflow around a Godzilla!

Taken in an actual wind tunnel a few years ago, this proves that Godzilla was not designed by aerospace engineers.

iPhone and Consumer's Mistaken Desires.

Admittedly, it is rather trite to write about something as contemporary as the iPhone. In a month, you're not likely to find a single post about the thing, and right now the net is awash in commentary on this single topic. Amazingly, interviews at CES focused heavily in Apple, who doesn't even attend CES! Remind me to hire Steve Jobs to hype my next invention. It doesn't have to be an original idea. It just needs a minimalist approach and he'll declare bold, and the world will declare it good. In the days following the announcement stock for Apple jumped over $10/share, adding about 10 billion dollars to their investment portfolio. So many companies think that solid revenue earnings, reliable growth, and reasonable ROI (return on investment, I looked it up) are the key to making your stock price. But that's not the case. It's all about public opinion of the company. Do they come out with cool new things with Steve Jobs hyping them? If they do, they get $10 billion. If they don't, they end up in the innovation slush pile.
But forgive me, this is turning into a bitter rant, and off the topic I wish to actually address. The iPhone is an excellent case study in consumer confusion. Now, I must insert a disclaimer. I am actually relatively new to the area of product development, having only been involved for 2.5 years. In that time, I've seen right and wrong ways to do things. Through it all, one fact remains abundantly clear: People don't actually know what they want. They think they do, but it's an assumption. This is my gripe with Apple: They don't release products that are actually good for the consumer. They release what the consumer believes they want. The customer is happy, true, but ultimately worse off for buying into a company that panders to their desires rather than try to educate them and make them more wholly satisfied.
Given the huge number of Mac'philes that aren't reading this anyway, I'm going to insert another disclaimer regardless: The iPhone is not a bad piece of engineering. It's no doubt marvelously constructed, and has several features that are both innovative and endearingly clever. However, they're not worth $600, and some features touted and getting consumers genuinely excite are actually not what consumers really want. Specifically, I'm referring to the touch screen and complete removal of a keypad. This is a topic where, despite my lack of experience, I can claim some degree of authority. People like tactile feedback. 'Old school' phone designers have put tremendous amounts of effort into the tactile response of their keypads. The RAZR is sexy/slim, but also has a rewarding keypad. Touch screens obliterate the clicking sensation. You can't replace it with a sound, it's something you have to feel. Most people don't know this. They've never bothered with touch screens or, when they do, use a stylus. For products I've worked on, the development schedule has actually taken a hit to better improve the feel of a button, because don't like it unless you can feel and hear that satisfying click. Everyone believes that 1) Apple is a house of total innovation and 2) Apple comes out with new products therefore conclude that Apple is innovative. I beg to differ. There are maybe two or three features in the iPhone that are truly unique, but alternative products (all in ones, not separate products) exist already that either meet or exceed this products capabilities, for equal to or lesser prices.
The difference? Steve Jobs. He knows what people think they want to hear, and tells them that. For that, he gets $10 billion for his company, and people receive a product that will ultimately make them suffer. You've got a product with an unsatisfying touch feedback, and you're out $600. Sure it's hip, and you're a cooler person to own one (my mom thinks I'm cool!), but form has truly conquered function.

On the topic of social networks

I have a facebook account. My wife has a myspace account. One might argue that we should both either an account with facebook or myspace. Or, barring that agreement, have dual accounts. I disagree. A few months ago, shortly after an old friend invited me to join facebook, I had the luxury of sitting through jury duty. While waiting for my number to get called, I had the opportunity to stare at the ceiling and watch the paint peel. Alas, it was a well maintained building, and a lack of entropy in my surroundings left me to my own thoughts. It's stuff that shows up in places like that that will end up tarring the whitespace of this blog screen.
I began to consider the value proposition of social networks. I'd recently read an article on the topic of etiquette in these realms. Friendships in the real world were getting hurt by these sites. "But why?!" you might ask, "Are friends using a website to talk to each other when they can just talk to each other?" That's when it hit me. Social networks exist for the sake of distant friends and acquaintances. One of the things that discourages me from calling up old friends to chew the fat, as we once did, is the fact that we must first catch up on all that has happened. That could take hours, maybe months! What's more, you're going to have to do it every time you call up some other old acquaintance. Social networks free you of this responsibility! You want to catch up? Read their posts. Where are they living? Read their background. That way, the nature of your relationships with distant friends does not change as much. You really can chew the fat as you once did.
Do not, however, add people that you see daily to your network. This service is not intended for them. A social network is a band-aid to allow friends who don't have the luxury of seeing each other daily the opportunity to keep up without the heavy maintenance. They don't need to read about your day, they were already there! You cannot wax nostalgic over something that happened two hours ago. It's not the good ole' times if it's still going on.
That is why my wife browses myspace, and I browse facebook.
That, and we're too lazy to create more pages. It's hard enough updating just one.

My 1st blog

Like several other hundred thousand, possibly even several million people, I have chosen to create a blog today. It is my hope that what I write will not so much be an account of what I do from day to day (as I'm a rather boring person), and present more of what the grey matter has been processing lately.
Let's get a few things straight:
1. I like to write.
2. I don't have the best taste in movies (re. Godzilla)
3. I am a nerd, but an introspective one.
That said, I think I'm going to go to bed without dropping a single insight.
No reason to push myself, as few, if any one, is ever going to read this.