Sunday, July 26, 2009
July 26, 2009; In which I concede defeat
So, I am totally not going to do a true daily blog. I've decided that six days a week is plenty and I like one night off. That said, this counts as an entry and real entries will be back tomorrow! Ha ha!!
Friday, July 24, 2009
June 24, 2009; In which I review a movie
Tonight I went and saw Gerard Butler and Katherine Hiegel in The Ugly Truth, and to be perfectly frank, I enjoyed it.
The premise is pretty simple. It's a romantic comedy about an uptight network TV producer and a brash, over-the-top commentator whose favorite topic is relationship advice between men and women. He's the man's man, loud and confident and not afraid to tell it how it is. She's the control-freak professional woman with a checklist for how she wants her man. Hilarity is bound to ensue.
Without giving away too much of the plot, which is actually pretty smart and keeps the viewer very involved, most of the story center's around Abby (Hiegel's uptight but sexy character) trying to win over Collin, the sexy doctor next door. With the help of Mike (Butler), the host of "The Ugly Truth," she makes herself into what every guy wants.
The best characters in the film are, by far, the two anchors on Abby's show. They are absolutely hilarious in every interaction, and nearly all of their scenes made me laugh out loud.
Overall the whole film is well-written and well-acted. If you're looking for something funny that will make you feel good, I suggest it. Go see.
The premise is pretty simple. It's a romantic comedy about an uptight network TV producer and a brash, over-the-top commentator whose favorite topic is relationship advice between men and women. He's the man's man, loud and confident and not afraid to tell it how it is. She's the control-freak professional woman with a checklist for how she wants her man. Hilarity is bound to ensue.
Without giving away too much of the plot, which is actually pretty smart and keeps the viewer very involved, most of the story center's around Abby (Hiegel's uptight but sexy character) trying to win over Collin, the sexy doctor next door. With the help of Mike (Butler), the host of "The Ugly Truth," she makes herself into what every guy wants.
The best characters in the film are, by far, the two anchors on Abby's show. They are absolutely hilarious in every interaction, and nearly all of their scenes made me laugh out loud.
Overall the whole film is well-written and well-acted. If you're looking for something funny that will make you feel good, I suggest it. Go see.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
July 23, 2009; In which I discuss things everyone should already know
Blu-Ray. What is it? What's it do? What's it good for? Why should anyone care at all?
Allow me to tell you.
Blu-Ray is the disc format that "won" the high definition war, and is also the format that Playstation 3 games are printed on. I use the term printed lightly, but you get what I mean. Now, as for the competition (read "everything else") there exists almost exclusively the DVD. Whether it's the DVD-5, a five gigabyte disc, or a DVD-9, the becoming-more-common nine gig disc, neither one has nearly as much space as the Blu-Ray disc (twenty-five gigabytes of space on a single-layered disc, fifty for a double). Now you have a very basic understanding of that. And, we move on to the questions I presented above.
What does a BD-DVD do that a regular DVD doesn't? Well, aside from high definition video and massive space, Blu-Ray allows for a much more interactive movie experience. Most Blu-Ray movies have an interactive in-film menu that lets you open it while you watch to change any setting on the fly, or watch with an enhanced experience through various features. Movies aside, the real kicker comes in gaming. On a Blu-Ray disc, there are up to fifty gigabytes of space for content. That means the high definition, expansive, massive worlds that are created go onto a Blu-Ray with much less compression and a much easier-to-read format. As games get bigger, with more to the experience and intensely massive content, it can take multiple DVDs to hold one game as opposed to one Blu-Ray.
Why should you care? Maybe you shouldn't. If you aren't a gamer or a movie-lover, it probably means nothing at all to you. If you like movies or games or tech, then you probably already know most of the stuff I just wrote, and that's great. Buuuuuut... That's about it. That's all I gotta say.
Allow me to tell you.
Blu-Ray is the disc format that "won" the high definition war, and is also the format that Playstation 3 games are printed on. I use the term printed lightly, but you get what I mean. Now, as for the competition (read "everything else") there exists almost exclusively the DVD. Whether it's the DVD-5, a five gigabyte disc, or a DVD-9, the becoming-more-common nine gig disc, neither one has nearly as much space as the Blu-Ray disc (twenty-five gigabytes of space on a single-layered disc, fifty for a double). Now you have a very basic understanding of that. And, we move on to the questions I presented above.
What does a BD-DVD do that a regular DVD doesn't? Well, aside from high definition video and massive space, Blu-Ray allows for a much more interactive movie experience. Most Blu-Ray movies have an interactive in-film menu that lets you open it while you watch to change any setting on the fly, or watch with an enhanced experience through various features. Movies aside, the real kicker comes in gaming. On a Blu-Ray disc, there are up to fifty gigabytes of space for content. That means the high definition, expansive, massive worlds that are created go onto a Blu-Ray with much less compression and a much easier-to-read format. As games get bigger, with more to the experience and intensely massive content, it can take multiple DVDs to hold one game as opposed to one Blu-Ray.
Why should you care? Maybe you shouldn't. If you aren't a gamer or a movie-lover, it probably means nothing at all to you. If you like movies or games or tech, then you probably already know most of the stuff I just wrote, and that's great. Buuuuuut... That's about it. That's all I gotta say.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
July 22, 2009; In which I discuss belief
Sometimes I see something or hear something that gets me thinking, and I can't get it out of my head. If I'm lucky it's chainsaw swords or other fun things like that. If I'm not so lucky, it's something that I really can't do anything about. Today it was a faith/ religion-related bit... I saw a T-shirt for the Creation Museum. Now, I had heard about this establishment before, and the very idea of it is strange to me. I have nothing against religion or creation theories, but one of the things I've heard about this particular venue is that it features displays of humans and dinosaurs walking together.
Okay, I should have said this before, but the following might be a little offensive. I will try to keep it as completely civil as I can, but this is an issue that, try as I might, I cannot be fair and balanced on.
I am not religious, though I was raised Roman Catholic. My mom is a science teacher, so I had a very open line of dialogue with both religious and scientific origin theories. I was exposed to a lot of them, everything from Adam and Eve to a giant turtle to the Big Bang to the seven days = four billion years idea to Amaterasu and all that falls in between. There aren't many lines of thought on that road that I haven't at least looked down. I have to say, though, that while I don't know how we started I am pretty sure, in my own mind, what didn't happen. I cannot personally believe that a being created the whole Earth and everything on it at the same time, and it's been around for only a few measly millennia. It just seems so contradictory to modern thoughts and scientific findings to me that my mind automatically pushes it into the "blather" pile, despite the fact that I know some people who believe this and they are all wonderful and kind human beings.
I can understand creationists who say that fossils were planted by God to test our faith. That at least makes some sense, albeit a very warped kind of sense that makes me nod my head and mutter something about "mysterious ways." It is easy for me to imagine that whatever creator, be it God or the universe's infinite probability or what have you, started this planet's formation with the necessary factors to create life and thus life evolved in the forms we know today over hundreds and hundreds of millions of years. I cannot understand how so much science can just be ignored. If humans walked with dinosaurs why aren't they mentioned in the Bible? Why don't we see crude paintings of T-Rex's in caves? Why are they buried under millions of years of sediment while our oldest human remains date back no more than two million years and even those are questionably homo sapien?
I think I should end this before I go too far, and some might say I've done that already. Others will say I didn't go far enough, but this is my stopping point. I will leave you with this thought:
I understand faith. I understand believers. What I do not understand is the need to warp the world to your own beliefs instead of embracing that your dogma, whatever it is, was laid down by people who didn't know everything there was to know. Humans are by nature fallible, but we cannot fault ourselves for it. We seek answers because of this ability to be wrong, because we need to be right. Just know when to accept that right for a thousand years ago and right for today might not be the same.
And who knows? Maybe I'm the one who's wrong.
Okay, I should have said this before, but the following might be a little offensive. I will try to keep it as completely civil as I can, but this is an issue that, try as I might, I cannot be fair and balanced on.
I am not religious, though I was raised Roman Catholic. My mom is a science teacher, so I had a very open line of dialogue with both religious and scientific origin theories. I was exposed to a lot of them, everything from Adam and Eve to a giant turtle to the Big Bang to the seven days = four billion years idea to Amaterasu and all that falls in between. There aren't many lines of thought on that road that I haven't at least looked down. I have to say, though, that while I don't know how we started I am pretty sure, in my own mind, what didn't happen. I cannot personally believe that a being created the whole Earth and everything on it at the same time, and it's been around for only a few measly millennia. It just seems so contradictory to modern thoughts and scientific findings to me that my mind automatically pushes it into the "blather" pile, despite the fact that I know some people who believe this and they are all wonderful and kind human beings.
I can understand creationists who say that fossils were planted by God to test our faith. That at least makes some sense, albeit a very warped kind of sense that makes me nod my head and mutter something about "mysterious ways." It is easy for me to imagine that whatever creator, be it God or the universe's infinite probability or what have you, started this planet's formation with the necessary factors to create life and thus life evolved in the forms we know today over hundreds and hundreds of millions of years. I cannot understand how so much science can just be ignored. If humans walked with dinosaurs why aren't they mentioned in the Bible? Why don't we see crude paintings of T-Rex's in caves? Why are they buried under millions of years of sediment while our oldest human remains date back no more than two million years and even those are questionably homo sapien?
I think I should end this before I go too far, and some might say I've done that already. Others will say I didn't go far enough, but this is my stopping point. I will leave you with this thought:
I understand faith. I understand believers. What I do not understand is the need to warp the world to your own beliefs instead of embracing that your dogma, whatever it is, was laid down by people who didn't know everything there was to know. Humans are by nature fallible, but we cannot fault ourselves for it. We seek answers because of this ability to be wrong, because we need to be right. Just know when to accept that right for a thousand years ago and right for today might not be the same.
And who knows? Maybe I'm the one who's wrong.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
July 21, 2009; In which I infer news from a headline
So I saw today that Obama and the Senate have decided to discontinue production of the F-22 Raptor fighter jet. I look at this with mixed feelings, as both a practical thinker and a fan of high-tech stuff that makes things go boom. First, a few things about the Raptor.
I'm no expert on military or Air Force tech, but it's not hard to know that the F-22 is one of the most advanced pieces of hardware in the world. This thing can practically fly itself, and with a skilled pilot it is a devastating weapon against anything in the air, on land, or on sea. It's also one of the most expensive pieces of ordnance in our current military line-up, and not quite necessary or practical when we are so far beyond our enemies in everyday combat. In this current day and age, with brushfire wars fought against insurgencies with Kalashnikovs and C-4, air superiority is more about accurate and concise bombing than moving at mach three and firing heat-seeking missiles that can rip a MIG apart in less than two seconds.
Looking at the decision practically, I have to agree with the bureaucrats on this one. The Raptor, while being extremely awesome, is impractical. We're moving more and more toward peace between nations, and most of the groups we fight couldn't buy a squad of fighters, much less the armaments and maintenance and pilots and runways to put them in the air. There will be no more dogfights, no more air battles in our day unless something in the geopolitical sphere gets way out of whack. I think that's pretty easy to see, and the guys on top are betting on diplomacy. Maintaining complete military superiority would be great, but there isn't a lot of need for it if the battles stop.
That's about all I've got to say right now. I might say more later about planes, politics, firepower, and combat, and that sort of thing, but for now I've said my piece.
I'm no expert on military or Air Force tech, but it's not hard to know that the F-22 is one of the most advanced pieces of hardware in the world. This thing can practically fly itself, and with a skilled pilot it is a devastating weapon against anything in the air, on land, or on sea. It's also one of the most expensive pieces of ordnance in our current military line-up, and not quite necessary or practical when we are so far beyond our enemies in everyday combat. In this current day and age, with brushfire wars fought against insurgencies with Kalashnikovs and C-4, air superiority is more about accurate and concise bombing than moving at mach three and firing heat-seeking missiles that can rip a MIG apart in less than two seconds.
Looking at the decision practically, I have to agree with the bureaucrats on this one. The Raptor, while being extremely awesome, is impractical. We're moving more and more toward peace between nations, and most of the groups we fight couldn't buy a squad of fighters, much less the armaments and maintenance and pilots and runways to put them in the air. There will be no more dogfights, no more air battles in our day unless something in the geopolitical sphere gets way out of whack. I think that's pretty easy to see, and the guys on top are betting on diplomacy. Maintaining complete military superiority would be great, but there isn't a lot of need for it if the battles stop.
That's about all I've got to say right now. I might say more later about planes, politics, firepower, and combat, and that sort of thing, but for now I've said my piece.
Monday, July 20, 2009
July 20, 2009; In which I gripe about computers
Recently I sent my Sony Vaio laptop into Best Buy, the location from whence it was purchased, because it was malfunctioning at a level that basically prohibited use. I expected the problem to be easily solved by the experts there, but since it wasn't under a Best Buy warranty they could do nothing but ship it out to Sony for them to fix. I had told them that the problem was likely in motherboard, seeing as I had reformatted the hard drive and checked the memory, the other likely cuprits for the problems I was experiencing. It was about three or four weeks before I actually got the computer back.
Lo and behold, there was no change. I found out later that the only work the Sony technicians had done on it was to check the memory and reformat the hard drive. They didn't look at anything else, just saw that those components were working and sent it back. So, of course, my computer is still in basically the same state it was in before. I called their customer service and was walked through a system diagnosis that failed, because my computer characteristically froze in the middle of doing absolutely anything. So I was told that I would be contacted when a technician could get to me.
That was last week. Here's hoping I'll have a working laptop by the time I go back to school, eh? But I'm not complaining. I still have the home desktop to work from, and it functions just fine.
Except that now the monitor is flashing oddly, and my preferred browsers (Google Chrome and Firefox) don't seem to work anymore, and there have been more problems with the home wireless network than I can shake a stick at...
Basically, I've decided that computers don't like me. They'll put up with me for a short while, but prolonged exposure seems to get them feeling a little suicidal. This is quite a change from the past few years, when I seemed to be the go-to computer guy around the house. Funny how things change with time...
This post is going up a little late, and I missed Sunday, but it was only hopefully daily in the first place, so NEH!!
Lo and behold, there was no change. I found out later that the only work the Sony technicians had done on it was to check the memory and reformat the hard drive. They didn't look at anything else, just saw that those components were working and sent it back. So, of course, my computer is still in basically the same state it was in before. I called their customer service and was walked through a system diagnosis that failed, because my computer characteristically froze in the middle of doing absolutely anything. So I was told that I would be contacted when a technician could get to me.
That was last week. Here's hoping I'll have a working laptop by the time I go back to school, eh? But I'm not complaining. I still have the home desktop to work from, and it functions just fine.
Except that now the monitor is flashing oddly, and my preferred browsers (Google Chrome and Firefox) don't seem to work anymore, and there have been more problems with the home wireless network than I can shake a stick at...
Basically, I've decided that computers don't like me. They'll put up with me for a short while, but prolonged exposure seems to get them feeling a little suicidal. This is quite a change from the past few years, when I seemed to be the go-to computer guy around the house. Funny how things change with time...
This post is going up a little late, and I missed Sunday, but it was only hopefully daily in the first place, so NEH!!
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
July 17, 2009; In which I blather on for a while about various things
Date: Friday, July 17, 2009
Time: 10:07 PM
Location: My family room computer
Listening to: My Pandora radio stations/ Quick Mix
Mood: Wistful
I just got my ass whooped by my father in a game of Risk, and I had a great time. See, it's been so long since I sat down and played a board game that I forgot how fun it is, not just playing the game, but actually sitting around a table with a few fun people and laughing, smiling, scowling, cursing, and shouting about whatever happens to be happening. It truly is an amazing thing. I will have to take some board games back to school when I go.
My brother has a couple friends over at the moment and they're playing Mario Kart. That's pretty much my favorite game on the Wii right now. It's actually fun. Continuing on the video game track, I'm kind of a PlayStation fanboy. I can recognize the various merits of the other systems, but when it comes right down to my own opinion on gaming I think the Triple is the best system on the market.
I love making paper airplanes. Most of them don't fly, though. I mostly make them to see what wacky designs I can come up with, just because I enjoy crafting and creating. It's a simple and quick little project that I can whip out at any time.
I believe they're shouting about Kenyans on the floor below me. I am mildly amused.
Warranties are great. I recently ripped the cord out of a pair of expensive headphones and got them replaced, along with a new warranty. I am headphone-prtected for the next two years and that's awesome.
Honestly, I have nothing of any importance to say. When I started this I couldn't decide if it would be a journal or just a place for me to post little essays, journals, sweet nothings...
I wish I was a superhero. I think I'll write a whole post on superheroes soon.
I have plans for this thing, I really do... Right now I'm just getting myself into the habit of blogging every night. Don't worry, meaningful content will probably start up next week. As for this weekend, I'll be playing a gig tomorrow night and possibly on a boat on Sunday, so expect early entries.
That's all I've got. I'm gonna go and play Mario Kart with some kids two to four years my juniors and have an absolutely silly time of it. Don't judge!
Thursday, July 16, 2009
July 16, 2009; In which I craft a somewhat rushed entry because I may not be home later
Today is a glorious day in my hometown. Or, rather, the beginning of this week was the glorious bit and I'm coming into it a bit late. Why all the glory, you ask? Well, it's really quite simple. My fair little city has once again been graced by the presence of Taco Bell.
Between my going back to school after Spring Break and my return home for the summer, the Taco Bell that had stood for so long in our illustrious town was completely torn down, with construction starting on a new building rather quickly. This construction lasted an extremely long time. Now, while I am not the biggest Taco Bell fan in the world, I do occasionally enjoy some good fake Mexican food (though I'm not a fan of the authentic stuff, surprisingly). I've been waiting a few days to actually make my triumphant return to the prodigal store due to massive lines every time I drive by the place.
No, I am not kidding. This Taco Bell must have repaid the entire cost of construction within the first day of reopening, because they haven't had a slow moment. Apparently the people around here really missed cheap tacos.
I wish I had more for you, but if I'm going to get a taco and get to rehearsal (which I might talk about tomorrow) I gotta run! See you tomorrow!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
July 15, 2009; In which I contemplate the English language
In less than ninety minutes I will be going to a rehearsal I am honestly not entirely prepared for, and my biggest concern at the moment is that my tushy feels a little damp and I think someone may have spilled something in this chair.
And now my biggest concern is the word "spilled." I am wondering if it should be spilled or spilt. In fact, I think my topic for the day is going to be grammar, and the differences between American English and British (or, "The Queen's") English. And I will point out now that I am doing no additional research, because I don't feel like it.
Aside from small differences in regional dialect, including accents and colloquials, there are a lot of things that make the two English languages legitimately different while remaining fundamentally the same. Take, for example, the spelling of many words. Grey versus gray, aluminium versus aluminum, colour versus color, and so on and so on. Then just look at the different names for common items. What we in America call "potato chips" are refered to as "crisps" across the pond, and our "cookies" are their "biscuits." A lorry in England is a truck, but they have trucks too. Where are our lorries?
Of course, one must wonder at times why the languages seem so different when it's really pretty much the same? I imagine the reason for the differences go something like this:
Back when the colonies broke off and became the States and Britain started looking at this new country like some backwater hootenany that got lucky in a little war, the only way to communicate between the continents was through a long trans-oceanic voyage. So, between America's independence and the invention of the telephone (or radio, or basically anythiing that actually transmitted voice over long distances), the two cultures were allowed to evolve their dialects however they pleased. Other factors included industry, education, science, and immigration. Industry and science both introduced new words to the language constantly, and it could be months before word reached the other country. In that time, the spelling or pronunciation of the words often changed slightly without the other nation finding out for more months, even years. Education levels also contributed, as lower-educated areas often had simplified spellings of words (thru instead of through, or at least I like to think that's the reason). Finally, as immigrants flooded the States, they brought with them their own languages and cultures that didn't factor in as much as in Britain.
Aaaaand, that's why the languages are different.
Was I going somewhere with that?
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
July 14, 2009; In which I discuss socks.
It is eleven o'clock at night on July 14th and my mind is wandering. Let me start by saying that the fact I have told you even that much is something of an accomplishment. As much as I fancy myself a writer, I have what might be the worst track record for finished projects in the history of people who frequently use the words "track record" and write about it... And let me continue by saying that it is an accomplishment because I plan to update this blog with something every day. But, as it is Hopefully Daily, this is not a guarantee.
Anyway, back to my wandering mind.
It is a truly unremarkable date. Save the fact that seven is half of fourteen and it just so happens to be Bastille Day (which applies to me not at all), the fourteenth of July means nothing to me.
And so neither does my topic for the day. My topic is socks.
Did you ever think about socks? I mean really sit down and give them some good brainspace? Until I was loading probably a hundred of them into the washing machine, I didn't. It got me thinking about what they are, where they came from, and why we persistently wear them. Allow me to take that piece by piece.
Socks are, in their most basic state, little cloth bags for your feet. They keep your feet marginally warmer than just shoes and provide a buffer between your skin and the often-abrasive inside of conventional footwear. They also collect all of the grime and foot-sweat so your shoes stink just a little bit less at the end of the day. And they get no respect. Other than hanging stockings up for Santa Claus, I was never raised to respect my socks. I never appreciated them. They were just there. Dirty or clean barely even mattered most of the time, because I was a child and kids simply aren't allowed to think about things like how clean their clothes are. Now that I am a little older, though, I like to think I take better care of my preliminary footwear.
Socks have been around basically as long as clothes, for the simple reason that a long long time ago some dude's feet got cold and scratched up. SO, he took a bit of animal skin and some ropey-type twine made from plant fibers and made himself a foot-bag. He probably referred to it as such, as well. Actually, more likely, it was probably a woman who invented this first sock, looking at her mate Ugoogoo's worn and disgusting feet. Ugoogoo was mocked and ridiculed relentlessly, until the other women of his little nomadic hunting tribe forced their male counterparts to wear the foot-bags as well. Over the next few centuries, the sock grew to be more refined, eventually being made from more comfortable materials following the invention of the shoe. By this point, thousands of people had all independently discovered or been told of socks, shoes, galoshes, and other footwear. There are socks in nearly every society, or at least every society worth noting. Show me one civilization that survived without socks! You can't! They're all dead now, from colds they got by stomping about in the winter with no socks on!
All right, about half of that was pure fabrication, but socks really have been around for a long time. I even have a source! It's this website!
Now, why do people wear socks? If you ask me, it's both a societal norm and a practical thing to do. Socks are inexpensive and prevent blisters, as well as keep your feet warm. What's not to like? Just, please, do not wear them with sandals. I'm all for tackiness, but that's just wrong.
Well, an unremarkable topic for an unremarkable day, but it's my first topic for my first day. Peace out, and see you tomorrow!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
