Well, audioscrobbler seems to have bitten the big one for the time being, so just ignore the links I posted previously.
It was homecoming weekend these past few days, which means parties, football, tailgating, lots of handshaking, and general tom-foolery and shenanigans (and other cliche words for mischief). What draws these alumni back? Why bother hanging out with a bunch of frat boys? Nostalgia is probably a motivation for some, but I don't think that that would be enough for everyone. After we did our end-of-party songs last night, I overheard one of the early 90s graduates say something like "that's awesome, those're the same songs we did when I was here." Maybe it's things like this that really draw them back. They're not coming back just to re-live the old days, or just to see their old buddies. The alumni come back to make sure that a bit of their legacy lived on. Not quite in the same sense that a man's children carry on his legacy, but similarly. They want to see that the traditions, even the minor ones, are alive and well, and still fun. Well, there is nostalgia in that too, but I still think that it goes beyond it. They're not recapturing a piece of their youth, they're making sure that the young still enjoy their own youth. Or maybe I'm just imagining what I want my experience as an alumnus to be, or what the ideal alumnus should feel. I can't speak for the motives or intentions of a few dozen people whom I met for no more than a few minutes apiece while they were drunk. Oh well, it's something to think about at least.
Carmen
I've decided that I really do love the French language. Even though I scraped by with a C in the class, and hated every minute of it. I think the main problem was the teacher, not the language. Or maybe it was my unwillingness to study. I'm not sure. But, while Latin is fun, and I'll keep up with it, a part of me wishes that I had kept up on French. Maybe I'll try it again later in life, when I'm rich and famous. Yes, it is a beautiful language. Especially when sung. In opera. Yes! I admit it! I like opera! I had my playlist on random, and part of Carmen came on... And I didn't skip it. I couldn't skip it. So I started at the beginning and I've been listening ever since. I think it's what I'm going to be listening to for a week or two, just so I have a chance to absorb the whole work. It's going to screw up my audioscrobbler statistics terribly, but I just don't care, because it's that good. Give it a listen if you have a chance and you're feeling open-minded.
Audioscrobbler!
Check out Audioscrobbler. You sign up, then install a plugin for your favorite music player (pretty much everything is supported - Winamp, XMMS, Windows Media Player, iTunes, etc.) and it updates what you've been listening to recently, and does some neat statistics and so on. And it puts this on the web for all to see. Which could, of course, be a bad thing if you're a closet Backstreet Boys fan or something, but that's your problem. It's fun to see what your friends have been listening to recently, and giving it a listen if it's something you haven't heard before. My profile is at http://www.audioscrobbler.com/users/vokyvsd. Give it a shot.
HIV, Heroin, and Homosexuals
The continuing saga of the lectures...
The speaker today was some quaint old lady. I've pretty much forgotten any of her arguments because of one part of her speech. She claimed that the only way that the HIV virus can be transferred is by male homosexual activity and dirty needles used for mainlining heroin. Now before you object and mention blood transfusion, heterosexual sex, and various other methods of transferring bodily fluids, bear in mind that I'm well aware of all of these. But according to this speaker, there are only two methods of contracting AIDS. She continued on with her speech, while Noah, J, Spence and I kinda looked at each other with our jaws on the floor. So then during questions and answers, someone called her out on it, mentioning the AIDS epidemic sweeping Africa, and the notable lack of homosexual activity or heroin usage accompanying it. She replied by saying that she doesn't know what "those Africans" (her terminology, not mine) are doing, and we have no reliable sources of information over there. So then a girl got up and said that she had been on mission trips to Africa, and had seen first hand that AIDS is very real over there, even among, and that there is no homosexual activity or heroin. Plus, she knew heterosexual people with AIDS. She stood there with the microphone saying this, and when she finished, that quaint old lady looked the girl in the eyes and told her that what she had just said was not true, and that there is no way to contract AIDS without dirty needles or male homosexual activity. Noah got up and left at this point. I almost followed, but I wanted to see what would happen next. When she started talking about how the kids get AIDS because their parents are addicted to heroin, and it's passed that way. Then J and I left. As I said yesterday, I consider myself to be fairly conservative on most issues, but deliberately ignoring reality because it doesn't suit your agenda is stupid, illogical, and just insane. I really can't comprehend how this lady has managed to twist her own mind to believe the things that she does. Not only this, but she had the temerity and poor grace to tell a girl that she had not seen what she said she had seen. I have to stop, I'm getting upset again.
The speaker today was some quaint old lady. I've pretty much forgotten any of her arguments because of one part of her speech. She claimed that the only way that the HIV virus can be transferred is by male homosexual activity and dirty needles used for mainlining heroin. Now before you object and mention blood transfusion, heterosexual sex, and various other methods of transferring bodily fluids, bear in mind that I'm well aware of all of these. But according to this speaker, there are only two methods of contracting AIDS. She continued on with her speech, while Noah, J, Spence and I kinda looked at each other with our jaws on the floor. So then during questions and answers, someone called her out on it, mentioning the AIDS epidemic sweeping Africa, and the notable lack of homosexual activity or heroin usage accompanying it. She replied by saying that she doesn't know what "those Africans" (her terminology, not mine) are doing, and we have no reliable sources of information over there. So then a girl got up and said that she had been on mission trips to Africa, and had seen first hand that AIDS is very real over there, even among, and that there is no homosexual activity or heroin. Plus, she knew heterosexual people with AIDS. She stood there with the microphone saying this, and when she finished, that quaint old lady looked the girl in the eyes and told her that what she had just said was not true, and that there is no way to contract AIDS without dirty needles or male homosexual activity. Noah got up and left at this point. I almost followed, but I wanted to see what would happen next. When she started talking about how the kids get AIDS because their parents are addicted to heroin, and it's passed that way. Then J and I left. As I said yesterday, I consider myself to be fairly conservative on most issues, but deliberately ignoring reality because it doesn't suit your agenda is stupid, illogical, and just insane. I really can't comprehend how this lady has managed to twist her own mind to believe the things that she does. Not only this, but she had the temerity and poor grace to tell a girl that she had not seen what she said she had seen. I have to stop, I'm getting upset again.
Underpopulation?
I've decided to stop naming my posts after whatever song I'm listening to at the moment, mainly because I just don't feel like doing it anymore. So now the titles will actually have something to do with the content of the post.
There was a lecturer on campus today who talked about the constitutionality of gay marriage and so on. Irrespective of my personal views on the matter, there are certain arguments which simply don't work. The lecturer (I can't remember his name) asserted that and increase in gay marriages leads to a decrease of birth rates. This makes sense. But he went on to say that a decreasing birthrate is a bad thing, because the world is underpopulated. My initial reaction to this was to paraphrase Reservoir Dogs - "That is the most insane fucking thing I have ever heard." Then I decided to step back, give him the benefit of the doubt, and question my own preconceptions. I was halfway through an interesting train of thought about farm land will eventually be valuable enough to make it more profitable than developing. But then he kept going, and said that the reason we need more people is that if we don't continue to increase the population, we'll end up spending more of the GDP on retirees. So we need more people to tax. Human beings are the greatest replenishable resource that we have, isn't that right? Yeah, so the population needs to increase until the end of time. Because if it doesn't, we're going to have to change our budget. We should ignore reality because it's inconvenient. I consider myself to be generally conservative, but when we start running up against finite limitations of natural resources, it's time to start making changes, no matter how painful it may be. And it's not like this is an abstract thing years down the road. He himself admitted that birth rates are dropping because it's not economical to have so many children. It sounds to me (to use a Hillsdale cliche) like the market is solving already. The human population has reached the limit of what the earth can sustain, and it has started to plateau. We need to change the way we conduct our business. We no longer have an infinite army of new taxpayers arising every generation. Time to change things.
There was a lecturer on campus today who talked about the constitutionality of gay marriage and so on. Irrespective of my personal views on the matter, there are certain arguments which simply don't work. The lecturer (I can't remember his name) asserted that and increase in gay marriages leads to a decrease of birth rates. This makes sense. But he went on to say that a decreasing birthrate is a bad thing, because the world is underpopulated. My initial reaction to this was to paraphrase Reservoir Dogs - "That is the most insane fucking thing I have ever heard." Then I decided to step back, give him the benefit of the doubt, and question my own preconceptions. I was halfway through an interesting train of thought about farm land will eventually be valuable enough to make it more profitable than developing. But then he kept going, and said that the reason we need more people is that if we don't continue to increase the population, we'll end up spending more of the GDP on retirees. So we need more people to tax. Human beings are the greatest replenishable resource that we have, isn't that right? Yeah, so the population needs to increase until the end of time. Because if it doesn't, we're going to have to change our budget. We should ignore reality because it's inconvenient. I consider myself to be generally conservative, but when we start running up against finite limitations of natural resources, it's time to start making changes, no matter how painful it may be. And it's not like this is an abstract thing years down the road. He himself admitted that birth rates are dropping because it's not economical to have so many children. It sounds to me (to use a Hillsdale cliche) like the market is solving already. The human population has reached the limit of what the earth can sustain, and it has started to plateau. We need to change the way we conduct our business. We no longer have an infinite army of new taxpayers arising every generation. Time to change things.
Shorty
One of my favorite websites to visit just to do a quick scan down the page is Fark. The stories are usually pretty good, and sometimes awesome, but the headlines can be spectacular. For example: "Janet Jackson's boob costs CBS $550,000. Not bad, considering it probably only cost Janet five grand" or "Scientists to map known universe, find Carmen Sandiego" -- brilliant. There are so many different media for humor. I mean, who knew that single-line headlines could be such a comedy goldmine?
On a tangent, who thought up sarcasm (or any other "type" of humor for that matter)? It's obvious that new jokes need to be invented, so they don't get boring, but entirely new fields of humor? How would peole find it funny at first? Sarcastic wit probably just made people seem like assholes before sarcasm was wide-spread. So I suppose that humor only changes when culture changes in such a way to make a new type of humor widely accepted. When humor changes, it is an indication of a shift in society as a whole. (By the way, I'm making this up as I go along, so if I end up taking a few paragraphs to reach an obvious conclusion, I apologize.) It makes one wonder what the hell kind of culture we have that finds most of the sitcoms out there to be funny. There, I said it. Well, sitcoms on network TV do need to get huge ratings to be profitable, because all of their revenue is from advertising, and huge ratings require catering to the lowest common denominator. Everyone has their own sense of humor, and the networks need to find comedy that can tickle as many funny bones as possible. Uniqueness is the bane of network television. Hmmm... That opens the door to all sorts of critiques of pop culture, capitalism, MTV, and so on...
But it's past my bedtime.
On a tangent, who thought up sarcasm (or any other "type" of humor for that matter)? It's obvious that new jokes need to be invented, so they don't get boring, but entirely new fields of humor? How would peole find it funny at first? Sarcastic wit probably just made people seem like assholes before sarcasm was wide-spread. So I suppose that humor only changes when culture changes in such a way to make a new type of humor widely accepted. When humor changes, it is an indication of a shift in society as a whole. (By the way, I'm making this up as I go along, so if I end up taking a few paragraphs to reach an obvious conclusion, I apologize.) It makes one wonder what the hell kind of culture we have that finds most of the sitcoms out there to be funny. There, I said it. Well, sitcoms on network TV do need to get huge ratings to be profitable, because all of their revenue is from advertising, and huge ratings require catering to the lowest common denominator. Everyone has their own sense of humor, and the networks need to find comedy that can tickle as many funny bones as possible. Uniqueness is the bane of network television. Hmmm... That opens the door to all sorts of critiques of pop culture, capitalism, MTV, and so on...
But it's past my bedtime.
Hey Ya!
OK, I don't care what anyone else thinks, or what's expected of me, or what my parents tell me I can think: Hey Ya! is a great song. It opens talking about his girlfriend and the relationship they have: He thinks that they're in love, and that he can trust his girlfriend completely, but he ends the first verse admitting that his parents have a better relationship. Then the second verse is soul searching about the nature of love: "If what they say it 'Nothing is forever' then what makes love the exception?" How the hell are relationships supposed to last? Then, the last line of the second verse: "Y'all don't want me here, you just wanna dance." The song completely shifts. No more soul searching and questioning the nature of love, rather we have typical rap inanities and so on. For example, "What's cooler than bein' cool? Ice Cold!" and "Shake it like a Polaroid picture!" It's the type of stuff that I usually make fun of rap for - but Andre 3000 knows exactly what he's doing. Tongue firmly in cheek, he's giving his audience exactly what they want to hear, and making fun of them at the same time, ala Devo's "Whip It" or Nirvana's "In Bloom". And not only are the lyrics brilliant, but the beat and chorus are incredibly catchy, if not good. So yes, I don't generally like rap, but OutKast has been growing on me.
I saw Garden State. I'm going to save the time and just tell you to go see it if you have a chance. It's very worth it, even if you have to sit in a squished back seat of a car filled with girls listening to N'Sync for half an hour. That's an exaggeration, but not too far.
On a final note, it turns out that 92% of all college men drink less than I do. Take that for what it's worth.
I saw Garden State. I'm going to save the time and just tell you to go see it if you have a chance. It's very worth it, even if you have to sit in a squished back seat of a car filled with girls listening to N'Sync for half an hour. That's an exaggeration, but not too far.
On a final note, it turns out that 92% of all college men drink less than I do. Take that for what it's worth.
The Battle of Evermore
I usually divide my social life into two parts: the sociable frat boy and the recluse geek. It's very rare to find a situation where the two cross paths. That's why, when people ask me how I wrote ffsearch, or when people start asking me about linux or some other geeky topic, I get embarassed and usually don't want to talk about it. Most of the time, I try to distance myself from the part of me that can write code and have long discussions about computer-related topics, because I'm quite frankly embarassed by it. I think it might be because I fit (or did fit) the stereotype so well: skinny, pale, annoyingly sarcastic, having a maddeningly superior air, and so on. And I don't like the stereotype. Or maybe it's because I'm insecure in my ability as a geek. I really don't know how to program all that well, and I know that one day I'm going to run in to someone who could talk circles around me about computer programming. So I try to keep it on the down-low, so that such a thing never happens, and I don't have to realize just how little I know. Whatever the reasons, I am embarassed by my geekyness, and try to avoid it in every-day speech.
That's why things like performance programming are so weird to me. I mean, programming on stage probably seems weird to everyone in some way or another. But for most people it's because such a thing is unusual, and not something that they would think of doing. My problem is that I could think of doing it, but I can't imagine that you actually would want to. After years of Pavlovian training, I'm automatically averse to any public display of nerdiness. And live coding is definitely that.
I think it all comes down to the fact that geekyness is (in my mind) inherently un-sexy. So I try to avoid it, because I want a girl. Maybe the type of girl who would refuse to go out with a geek isn't the type of girl I'd want anyway. But I still can't bring myself to be unashamed of being a geek, after so long of trying to avoid the stigma. Oh well, I'm going to lunch.
That's why things like performance programming are so weird to me. I mean, programming on stage probably seems weird to everyone in some way or another. But for most people it's because such a thing is unusual, and not something that they would think of doing. My problem is that I could think of doing it, but I can't imagine that you actually would want to. After years of Pavlovian training, I'm automatically averse to any public display of nerdiness. And live coding is definitely that.
I think it all comes down to the fact that geekyness is (in my mind) inherently un-sexy. So I try to avoid it, because I want a girl. Maybe the type of girl who would refuse to go out with a geek isn't the type of girl I'd want anyway. But I still can't bring myself to be unashamed of being a geek, after so long of trying to avoid the stigma. Oh well, I'm going to lunch.
Just Like Kurt
Some people are just in their element in certain media. For example, Dave Chapelle was/is pretty good at stand-up. But with TV skit comedy, he's in his element, and utterly hilarious. Seinfeld isn't that great of a stand-up comic, but with an episodic TV show about nothing he was brilliant. Conversely Robin Williams is a decent comic actor, but his stand-up is simply amazing.
Interjection by Dan: "Why are so many DJs for rappers white or Asian? Because it involves technical complexity!"
We were watching DMX on the Chapelle show.
I had a point to all of this, but I lost it. Damn it all.
Microsoft is playing catch-up again. They're no longer young and innovative. They can't compete. They're going to try to get into the online music store business. I mean, how can anyone consider them a good investment? They're a stagnant company. The only thing keeping them afloat is bureaucratic inertia and so on. Within 15 years, they'll have lost the gigantic lead on the desktop which they've enjoyed for so long, then they'll have an excuse to do some restructuring, slim down everything, and become competetive again. Unless they manage to illegally maintain their monopoly. But what the hell do I know? Anyway, what I was talking about originally is that their music store is coming out a year too late, they don't have a killer profit-making device to add on to it (ala iPod), and it's getting released as a beta. What the hell are they thinking? Oh well, they have the billions, not me.
...
Yet...
Interjection by Dan: "Why are so many DJs for rappers white or Asian? Because it involves technical complexity!"
We were watching DMX on the Chapelle show.
I had a point to all of this, but I lost it. Damn it all.
Microsoft is playing catch-up again. They're no longer young and innovative. They can't compete. They're going to try to get into the online music store business. I mean, how can anyone consider them a good investment? They're a stagnant company. The only thing keeping them afloat is bureaucratic inertia and so on. Within 15 years, they'll have lost the gigantic lead on the desktop which they've enjoyed for so long, then they'll have an excuse to do some restructuring, slim down everything, and become competetive again. Unless they manage to illegally maintain their monopoly. But what the hell do I know? Anyway, what I was talking about originally is that their music store is coming out a year too late, they don't have a killer profit-making device to add on to it (ala iPod), and it's getting released as a beta. What the hell are they thinking? Oh well, they have the billions, not me.
...
Yet...