Fabula

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Philosophical Precept #1

Due to the absolutely contingent nature of all things visible, there is no justification in criticizing the relative importance that an individual places on a specific feature of existence.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Wow! Long Time

It has been quite some time... what’s going on around here?

Monday, June 28, 2004

Exclusivity: orkut, Gmail, and Fahrenheit 9/11

This recent spate of Google's invite only services is frustrating, because it immediately makes me feel unpopular. I am, of course, referring to orkut and Gmail.

orkut is a by invitation only Friendster / MySpace type service. Here's what they say about themselves:

"orkut is unique, because it's an organically growing network of trusted friends. That way we won't grow too large, too quickly and everyone will have at least one person to vouch for them.

If you know someone who is a member of orkut, that person can invite you to join as well. If you don't know an orkut member, wait a bit and most likely you soon will.

We look forward to having you as part of the orkut community."

Gmail totes itself as "A Google approach to email". What makes it special is it's storage space. Allowing 1 GB of storage, Gmail says:

"Gmail is an experiment in a new kind of webmail, built on the idea that you should never have to delete mail and you should always be able to find the message you want."

These new Google innovations are fascinating -- of the social networking craze, Andrew Leonard of Salon.com writes:

"The venture capitalists and start-up CEOs call this 'the return of the consumer Internet,' but the truth is that nothing ever went away. Our attention may have lapsed -- I know mine did. After the dot-com crash, 9/11, corporate scandal and war, what people are doing online just doesn't seem as world-changingly important as it once did, last century. But that doesn't mean that we stopped doing things online -- on the contrary, more people are doing more things online than ever before, and social networking is an essential part of it. Like e-mail, like using a search engine, social networking is a part of the Internet way of life. And it's barely getting started."

The folks at Google are bright. Their marketing is incredible: they don't throw ads out there; they simply create the impression of exclusivity and wait for the demand to grow. I don't know how they're going to cash in on this stuff, but no doubt they've got some plan.

It's amusing when we contrast the internet with the images we see coming out of Iraq. Check out Fahrenheit 9/11 -- if for no other reason than it provides some footage that you probably haven't seen on the news.

Monday, May 10, 2004

Our Best Face

The mouse that roared 'No' says it wants to remain non-partisan

We're doing great on the international front, thanks for asking. Yes; we've had a few gliches in recent weeks. The prison abuse "scandal".

Check out Jeremy Reynalds scoop on the issue ('Maybe they were born that way') [Men's News Daily] -- he goes from prison abuse to gays in the military to gay marriage with a deftness that defies the imagination.

Quick to jump to conclusions, aren't they?

So what's the deal with Michael Moore's documentary, Fahrenheit 911 [IMDB]? Michael Moore's words:

Yesterday I was told that Disney, the studio that owns Miramax, has officially decided to prohibit our producer, Miramax, from distributing my new film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." The reason? According to today's (May 5) New York Times, it might "endanger" millions of dollars of tax breaks Disney receives from the state of Florida because the film will "anger" the Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush. [morons.org]

How do we think this is going to be perceived in the world at large? Do we care? We've got a bunch of Muslims sitting on the fence [Toronto Free Press] who may not be so quick to fall on their knees before the "Allied Juggernaut".

Why are we there, anyway?

What have we got left? Let's go over the list:

Weapons of Mass Destruction
Terrorist Ties
Freedom for Iraqi People
Oil
A Foothold in that Seething Cauldron of Chaos

Well, we've seen (1) collapse [Double Standards] (Is this an impeachable offense? [FindLaw]), (2) has pretty much been discarded [Editor & Publisher], and I think with the prison abuse scandal, we've pretty much ruled out (3) -- at least in the minds of the average Iraqi.

So what's left? (4) is cute, but a bit trite (I'm sure there is some basis for it -- but really, it's a bit of a stretch).

That Brings Us To (5)

We've got to quell that demon in the Middle East! He's thirsting for western blood, and the seething is just getting worse. He hates McDonalds and Blockbuster, he detests Walmart and General Motors, and worst of all, he spits in the face of The Christ. What will the situation be like in 30 years? He has shaken and destroyed our greatest edifices, he has wrapped his fingers around our throats and we've got no choice left but to punch!

The problem is, who are we punching? And why? It reminds me of a giant in a bar fight. He's hit in the back of the head by a chair, so he punches the man standing in front of him. Sure, he knocks the man in front of him right out, but that just pisses off the man's friend, and the guy with the chair is still standing behind him! How many men can the giant take on? And even if he is big enough to level them all; what will he do then? Will the bartender still serve him drinks?

Alright, that's just silly. Take it easy.

Sunday, April 25, 2004

My girlfriend is making hamburgers. We had a huge debate this morning over who would go out and get the buns -- I think you can guess who ended up doing it. I also bought some Red Bull [1], which is such an interesting substance.

It's so interesting, in fact, that I've decided to look into it a bit. An 18 year old named Ross Cooney [2] [3] dropped dead in Ireland after consuming up to four Red Bulls and then playing basketball -- it was apparently decided that he died of "sudden adult death syndrome" [4], but an inquiry was launched to see if the drink posed a health risk. It appears that no real risk could be determined; however, the drink could not be proven to be conclusively safe, either.

An interesting tense in Spanish is the subjunctive. One uses it when expressing a variety of different ideas such as commands, negative commands, verbs that "express a wish, insistence, preference, suggestion, or request" [5] -- for example, "Quiero que Juan lo haga" -- which, in English, would be read "I want John to do it". Notice in English that the infinitive is used, whereas, in Spanish, it is subjunctive.

To form the subjunctive, drop the "o" from the first person present indicative, and for er and ir verbs, add the endings "a, as, a, amos, áis, an", and for ar verbs, add the endings "e, es, e, emos, éis, en". For example (I've only included the vosotros form for two verbs):

abrir (to open) - yo abra, tú abras, ella abra, nosotros abramos, ellos abran
acabar (to finish, complete) - yo acabe, tú acabes, ella acabe, nosotros acabemos, ellos acaben
adelantar (to advance) - yo adelante, tú adelantes, ella adelante, nosotros adelantemos, ellos adelanten
afeitarse (to shave oneself) - me afeite, te afeites, se afeite, nos afeitemos, se afeiten
almorzar (to lunch, to have lunch) - yo almuerce, tú almuerces, ella almuerce, nosotros almorcemos, ellos almuercen
gastar (to spend) - yo gaste, tú gastes, ella gaste, nosotros gastemos, vosotros gastéis, ellos gasten

Almorzar is tricky, because one would expect it to take the form of almuerzo, the first person indicative. But it does not. Also, note that the nosotros form, almorcemos, follows the form of the present indicative: this is not the case with all subjunctive verbs. For example,

aparecer (to appear, to show up) - yo aparezca, tú aparezcas, ella aparezca, nosotros aparezcamos, ellos aparezcan

pensar (to think) - piense, pienses, piense, pensemos, piensen
perder (to lose) - pierda, pierdas, pierda, perdamos, pierdan

contar (to count) - cuente, cuentes, cuente, contemos, cuenten
volver (to return) - vuelva, vuelvas, vuelva, volvamos, vuelvan

sentir (to feel) - sienta, sientas, sienta, sintamos, sientan

pedir (to ask) - pida, pidas, pida, pidamos, pidan

dormir (to sleep) - duerma, duermas, duerma, durmamos, duerman

andar (to walk) - ande, andes, ande, andemos, anden
buscar (to look for) - busque, busques, busque, busquemos, busquen
caer (to fall) - caiga, ciagas, ciaga, caigamos, caigan
conducir (to drive) - conduzca, conduzcas, conduzca, conduzcamos, conduzcan
conocer (to know) - conozca, conozcas, conozca, conozcamos, conozcan
construir (to build) - construya, construyas, construya, construyamos, construyan
continuar (to continue) - continúe, continúes, continúe, continuemos, continúen
creer (to believe) - crea, creas, crea, creamos, crean
dar (to give) - dé, des, dé, demos, den
decir (to say) - diga, digas, diga, digamos, digan
empezar (to begin) - empiece, empieces, empiece, empecemos, empiecen
esquir (to ski) - esquíe, esquíes, esquíe, esquiemos, esquíen
estar (to be) - esté, estés, esté, estemos, estén
haber (to have, auxiliary) - haya, hayas, haya, hayamos, hayan
hacer (to make, do) - haga, hagas, haga, hagamos, hagan
ir (to go) - vaya, vayas, vaya, vayamos, vayan
leer (to read) - lea, leas, lea, leamos, lean
oír (to hear) - oiga, oigas, oiga, oigamos, oigan
pagar (to pay) - pague, pagues, pague, paguemos, paguen
poder (can, to be able to) - pueda, puedas, pueda, podamos, puedan
poner (to place, put) - ponga, pongas, ponga, pongamos, pogan
querer (to like, to desire) - quiera, quieras, quiera, queramos, quieran
reír (to laugh) - ría, rías, ría, riamos, rían
saber (to know [a fact]) - sepa, sepas, sepa, sepamos, sepan
salir (to leave) - salga, salgas, salga, salgamos, salgan
seguir (to follow) - siga, sigas, siga, sigamos, sigan
ser (to be) - sea, seas, sea, seamos, sean
tener (to have) -- yo tenga, tú tengas, ella tenga, nosotros tengamos, vosotros tengáis, ellos tengan
traer (to bring) - traiga, traigas, traiga, traigamos, traigan
valer (to be worth) - valga, valgas, valga, valgamos, valgan
venir (to come) - venga, vengas, venga, vengamos, vengan
ver (to see) - vea, veas, vea, veamos, vean
volver (to return) - vuelva, vuelvas, vuelva, volvamos, vuelvan

Check out Solaris.

Wednesday, January 07, 2004

The Sierpinski Gasket [1, Weisstein] is a charming little image. It's actually got some pretty impressive properties. On an (x,y) grid, the easiest way to determine the next gasket goes like this: the color of pixel (a,b) is determined by the color of ((a-1,b-1) + (a+1,b-1)) mod 2.

Consider this: if we set a field of width 2n, and wrap the field (so that -n+1 is equivalent to n and n+1 is equivalent to -n), then we have interesting results with the gasket. If we assume that the only pixel with color value 1 in the first row of the gasket has x-cord 0, then if n is of the form 2^a for a any natural number, the gasket ceases to be complex after n iterations.

I find the generating equation for this gasket to be a very simple one: in fact, I stumbled upon it accidentally while I was playing around with cellular automatons. That such an obvious formula for automatons creates such an impressive object is intriguing. I've got a bit on cellular automatons and Stephen Wolfram in the post dated Jan 6, 2004.

Skiing moguls is a real challenge. I'm able to slam my way through them, and relatively rapidly, but it takes so much work. I'd like to know an easier way to do them; I've found a few sites [2] on the topic, but nothing extremely useful.

Tuesday, January 06, 2004

The secret to a successful animated movie: fish. Two of the most popular animated flicks of recent years are Disney's "The Little Mermaid", and Pixar (aka Disney's) "Finding Nemo". Both films contain fish.

Check out Stephen Wolfram's "A New Kind of Science". It's a bold conjecture, particularly in the sciences, where understatement is generally the rule. In this case, Wolfram has probably overstated things a bit -- particularly his assertion that he is the generator of this new science. But it is interesting.

One can't help but find the ideas behind A New Kind of Science fascinating: the philosophical implications of a universal computer are disturbing and powerful. Robert Wright summarizes the views of Edward Fredkin: "Fredkin believes that the Universe is very literally a computer and that it is being used by someone, or something, to solve a problem. It sounds like a good-news / bad-news joke: the good news is that our lives have purpose; the bad news is that their purpose is to help some remote hacker estimate pi to nine jillion decimal places." [1, Kurzweil] This is somewhat akin to Stephen Wolfram's perspective; for more information, click on the Kurzweil link above.

Speaking of Robert Wright, he's written a new book: Non-Zero. Check out the book's website [2, Wright], and an interesting review [3, DeLong]. Apparently, Wright believes that there is an arrow for human progress: one that points towards increasing complexity. He also posits that organic evolution is quite similar to cultural evolution; both point towards increasing complexity. While the reviewer, DeLong, disagrees with this idea, I think it has great merit. It is obvious, I think, that the world is more organically complex today than it was three billion years ago; I think this can also be seen in an isolated environment. Say, for example, a Petri dish. Life tends to complexify things; and, by the definition of evolution, this complexity leads, over time, to progress.

Why were the Germans called The Hun by American and British propaganda? Because of Kaiser Wilhelm II's decree to his soldiers in the 1899-1900 Boxer Rebellion to behave like the Hun: "let the Germans strike fear into the hearts, so he'll be feared like the Hun" [4]. This was seized upon by the Allied propaganda machine in 1914 and used to describe the German soldiers' so-called despicable conduct.