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.