![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
from comments @ boingboing: http://mansueto.lib.uchicago.edu/shelving.html
This kind of thing seems to really offend ink-on-aging-paper fetishists. I am agnostic about its esoteric telos (or lack thereof). I just find it an interesting inter-phase between traditional stacks and full-out digitization.
This kind of thing seems to really offend ink-on-aging-paper fetishists. I am agnostic about its esoteric telos (or lack thereof). I just find it an interesting inter-phase between traditional stacks and full-out digitization.
inconsistently prescient
Dec. 6th, 2008 12:07 am"Can the reader say what two numbers multiplied together will produce the number 8616460799? I think it unlikely that anyone but myself will ever know."
Jevons; The Principles of Science, 1874.
I can't help myself:
random_walker@homeless:~$ time factor 8616460799
8616460799: 89681 96079
real 0m0.006s
user 0m0.004s
sys 0m0.000s
Jevons; The Principles of Science, 1874.
I can't help myself:
random_walker@homeless:~$ time factor 8616460799
8616460799: 89681 96079
real 0m0.006s
user 0m0.004s
sys 0m0.000s
tangerine dream
Nov. 27th, 2008 12:30 amWhile they are not the most consistent musical group, Mysterious Semblance at the Strand of Nightmares from their Phaedra album is an absolutely stunning and pure piece of ambient music (although not perfect). Listening to it is one of the most calming and mystical experiences I can experience on demand. Part of this is of course, the coincidence of what memories I associate it with.
The title track is OK too, but a little bleepy.
And to think I found it just by downloading it arbitrarily from napster almost a decade ago.
The title track is OK too, but a little bleepy.
And to think I found it just by downloading it arbitrarily from napster almost a decade ago.
happy thanksgiving
Nov. 26th, 2008 05:48 pmBy borrowing a Vietnamese technique, we propose a one-level extension of the well-known turducken construction. Incorporating the balut, gives us immediately what we call the turduckeneggen. The concept is not new; it is an extension of the process of [1], to which we are endebted.
Unfortunately, the process cannot be extended at our current level of technology. We can imagine, however, that an aggressive specialized program of genetic manipulation may allow us the creation of a (possibly unviable) fertilized unborn chicken giving one partial level of extension: the turduckeneggenen (the validity can be argued; at the very least it is a turduckeneggenzygote).
[1]: http://smoser.blogspot.com/2008/05/duchiphail-2008.html
Unfortunately, the process cannot be extended at our current level of technology. We can imagine, however, that an aggressive specialized program of genetic manipulation may allow us the creation of a (possibly unviable) fertilized unborn chicken giving one partial level of extension: the turduckeneggenen (the validity can be argued; at the very least it is a turduckeneggenzygote).
[1]: http://smoser.blogspot.com/2008/05/duchiphail-2008.html
crow watch, vol. 3
Sep. 17th, 2008 09:31 pmcourtesy boingboing.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14745-crows-make-monkeys-out-of-chimps-in-mental-test.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=news9_head_dn14745
Honestly, the variability in these studies is a bit weird. Why are some of the crows such consistent dullards? I believe this was commented on in the wire-bending case too - some crows just don't get it. Could these "puzzles" be at the edge of tractability, picking out the brighter ones?
I'm also not convinced that they completely removed all auxiliary cues when they "changed the appearance" of the equipment. I think scientists underestimate the variety and richness of the environment, hoodwinked by their own reductionist standards (not that this is bad).
e.g. Steven Pinker cites in How the Mind Works, arguing that taboos are mostly cultural and not primal wisdom, a study which found that young children had no problem eating feces. Of course, they didn't offer shit to children; they offered an "unmistakable" simulation made of stinky cheese, chocolate and a few other things. Well, I'm convinced.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14745-crows-make-monkeys-out-of-chimps-in-mental-test.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=news9_head_dn14745
Honestly, the variability in these studies is a bit weird. Why are some of the crows such consistent dullards? I believe this was commented on in the wire-bending case too - some crows just don't get it. Could these "puzzles" be at the edge of tractability, picking out the brighter ones?
I'm also not convinced that they completely removed all auxiliary cues when they "changed the appearance" of the equipment. I think scientists underestimate the variety and richness of the environment, hoodwinked by their own reductionist standards (not that this is bad).
e.g. Steven Pinker cites in How the Mind Works, arguing that taboos are mostly cultural and not primal wisdom, a study which found that young children had no problem eating feces. Of course, they didn't offer shit to children; they offered an "unmistakable" simulation made of stinky cheese, chocolate and a few other things. Well, I'm convinced.
from boingboing
Sep. 15th, 2008 11:25 pmThis box is full of nothing but a camera and teh win: http://www.timknowles.co.uk/Work/PostalWorks/SpyBox/tabid/296/Default.aspx
Although it would be even funnier if the last frame were of a surprised and disgruntled DHS employee.
Although it would be even funnier if the last frame were of a surprised and disgruntled DHS employee.
(no subject)
Sep. 13th, 2008 08:38 pmThis parents' guide for whether or not to let their kids see Sin City is pretty funny; they detail each scene of violence, which does a pretty good job of summarizing the movie: http://www.kids-in-mind.com/s/sincity.htm
Also: "DISCUSSION TOPICS - Murder, revenge, love, torture, cannibalism, law and order, corruption, psychopaths, being framed for murder, child molestation, rape, serial killing, torment, pity, racism, humiliation. MESSAGE - Love can grow even out of the darkest circumstances."
That's not exactly the message I got, but whatever.
All in all, though, it's a good resource and their scheme (re-calibrated for general use) should be used instead of the current ratings. Their dataset would also be nice to run a regression on, to use their more detailed descriptions (including interactions) as predictors for receiving an R-or-worse rating. It's obvious that sex will "matter" more than violence, but we could also model time trends, and look for interactions (does a religious theme make profanity better or worse, &c.).
Also: "DISCUSSION TOPICS - Murder, revenge, love, torture, cannibalism, law and order, corruption, psychopaths, being framed for murder, child molestation, rape, serial killing, torment, pity, racism, humiliation. MESSAGE - Love can grow even out of the darkest circumstances."
That's not exactly the message I got, but whatever.
All in all, though, it's a good resource and their scheme (re-calibrated for general use) should be used instead of the current ratings. Their dataset would also be nice to run a regression on, to use their more detailed descriptions (including interactions) as predictors for receiving an R-or-worse rating. It's obvious that sex will "matter" more than violence, but we could also model time trends, and look for interactions (does a religious theme make profanity better or worse, &c.).
the first emo kid?
Sep. 13th, 2008 12:54 pmDid you know the lyrics for "Suicide is Painless" were written by Robert Altman's (the director of the MASH movie) son who was fourteen at the time?
OK, they're nothing deep as lyrics, but the funny thing is his kid made over a million dollars for song-writing credit, while Robert got paid $70K to direct the movie. Wow.
OK, they're nothing deep as lyrics, but the funny thing is his kid made over a million dollars for song-writing credit, while Robert got paid $70K to direct the movie. Wow.
some of that old-time science.
Sep. 12th, 2008 01:56 pmNeat: http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/AFRL_Proves_Feasibility_Of_Plasma_Actuators.html
I have memories of my ailerons failing in a flight simulator I used to have; that and shearing off the wings entirely in a mach 6 nose-dive. It was kind of funny since there was no sound effect or rendering for it; the status line at the bottom of the screen would just say "Wings ripped off" and you'd lose control (not that it mattered; to rip the wings off you basically had to be in an unrecoverable descent anyway).
Anyway, using heat to control the airflow does seem more stable than the "morphing" wings which can change shape in flight, although the results are probably much more modest as well.
I have memories of my ailerons failing in a flight simulator I used to have; that and shearing off the wings entirely in a mach 6 nose-dive. It was kind of funny since there was no sound effect or rendering for it; the status line at the bottom of the screen would just say "Wings ripped off" and you'd lose control (not that it mattered; to rip the wings off you basically had to be in an unrecoverable descent anyway).
Anyway, using heat to control the airflow does seem more stable than the "morphing" wings which can change shape in flight, although the results are probably much more modest as well.
I looked for this online for a while but couldn't find it. Someone from ---- found it for me, so I'm posting it here for a record.
http://ignatz.brinkster.net/cimages/cbreathedsketch.jpg
http://ignatz.brinkster.net/cimages/cbreathedsketch.jpg
After nearly a year now, my laptop has been discontinued and replaced with a widescreen model (rumored also to be generally more flimsy). I have the highest-end ultraportable Thinkpad which will ever have been made, with a 4:3 screen.
Neat. I don't like widescreens (for computing) in general but beyond that, using widescreen for small displays (12.1") specifically is just a bad idea period. Especially for business/enterprise oriented laptops like the X-series, where presumably a majority people are doing at least some important word processing or coding!
However, it's moot to protest; as I understand it, they changed over because the LCD manufacturers themselves are dropping their 4:3 lines like hotcakes. (sigh) Who watches movies on a 12.1" LCD anyway?
Here's one thing some of you might not have thought of: 8.5*(4/3)=11.3 which makes a rotated 4/3 display almost perfect for viewing letter-sized documents; to fit height-wise, we need to shrink the horizontal aspect to 97%; this is almost ideal because it introduces an implicit margin even for documents which don't have one. (Not having a margin is actually nauseating to me, since my eyes wind up auto-focusing on the wall behind the monitor. Sucks.)
On the other hand, 8.5*(16/9)=15.1, so we need to take the horizontal down to 73% width. Weak.
Now if you're using the more "civilised" A4 paper (notably the default even in many American LaTeX distributions), the story's about the same. 210mm*(4/3)=280mm which is a bit shy of 297mm, but not much! We just need to go down to 94% of height (and maybe a little more for a margin), no biggie. You can see where this is going: 210mm*(16/9)=373mm!!! That's 20% of the vertical, useless.
Now I suppose if you have a large enough monitor the extra vertical space could help for annotations, but I'd really rather have those on the sides anyway, as a simulacrum of marginalia.
Neat. I don't like widescreens (for computing) in general but beyond that, using widescreen for small displays (12.1") specifically is just a bad idea period. Especially for business/enterprise oriented laptops like the X-series, where presumably a majority people are doing at least some important word processing or coding!
However, it's moot to protest; as I understand it, they changed over because the LCD manufacturers themselves are dropping their 4:3 lines like hotcakes. (sigh) Who watches movies on a 12.1" LCD anyway?
Here's one thing some of you might not have thought of: 8.5*(4/3)=11.3 which makes a rotated 4/3 display almost perfect for viewing letter-sized documents; to fit height-wise, we need to shrink the horizontal aspect to 97%; this is almost ideal because it introduces an implicit margin even for documents which don't have one. (Not having a margin is actually nauseating to me, since my eyes wind up auto-focusing on the wall behind the monitor. Sucks.)
On the other hand, 8.5*(16/9)=15.1, so we need to take the horizontal down to 73% width. Weak.
Now if you're using the more "civilised" A4 paper (notably the default even in many American LaTeX distributions), the story's about the same. 210mm*(4/3)=280mm which is a bit shy of 297mm, but not much! We just need to go down to 94% of height (and maybe a little more for a margin), no biggie. You can see where this is going: 210mm*(16/9)=373mm!!! That's 20% of the vertical, useless.
Now I suppose if you have a large enough monitor the extra vertical space could help for annotations, but I'd really rather have those on the sides anyway, as a simulacrum of marginalia.
sugarfree products
Sep. 10th, 2008 09:52 pmI'm becoming a true connoisseur of sugar-free foods. Although the "artificialness" is apparent and jarring in mock-foods like the sugar-free strawberry preserves I bought because the store didn't have regular preserves, the situation is different in obliquely artificial foods like gum, candy and the resurging "candy shot" format, which are those hard pellets often minty or sour. Here, the tang and immediate distribution throughout your mouth of aspartame and sorbitol are quite enjoyable, as is the ghostly lingering aftertaste and its somewhat unpredictable effects on other flavors.
What brought me to this heresy? Mostly Orbit gum; their "citrusmint" flavor is great, as close as we can get to a Juicy Fruit which doesn't go bland immediately. I suppose they could make a sugared version and just don't want to for marketing reasons, however I've found that the initial bite into the gum has a nice "snap" to it which is probably due to the altered gum base which is used to give structure in lieu of sugar.
Also, did you know that the powder on wrapped gum is actually low-grade marble dust? It has to be flavorless and safe, and also most food-derived powders are humectants which would defeat the point.
I just ate a packet of IceBreakers Sours; they are made with a little bit of something called "neotame", which made me think of parepin when I first read it. Your body breaks it down into methanol, but even assuming 1:1 metabolism by weight, it's just around 0.1mg of methanol total so I don't think I'll go blind. The upshot of neotame is that it (supposedly) doesn't break down into phenylalanine, which is the big problem with standard aspartame (those sensitive (phenylketonurics) tend to die or have brain damage). It is however an untrusted new technology, and I first saw it on a label today though it's been around since 2002.
What brought me to this heresy? Mostly Orbit gum; their "citrusmint" flavor is great, as close as we can get to a Juicy Fruit which doesn't go bland immediately. I suppose they could make a sugared version and just don't want to for marketing reasons, however I've found that the initial bite into the gum has a nice "snap" to it which is probably due to the altered gum base which is used to give structure in lieu of sugar.
Also, did you know that the powder on wrapped gum is actually low-grade marble dust? It has to be flavorless and safe, and also most food-derived powders are humectants which would defeat the point.
I just ate a packet of IceBreakers Sours; they are made with a little bit of something called "neotame", which made me think of parepin when I first read it. Your body breaks it down into methanol, but even assuming 1:1 metabolism by weight, it's just around 0.1mg of methanol total so I don't think I'll go blind. The upshot of neotame is that it (supposedly) doesn't break down into phenylalanine, which is the big problem with standard aspartame (those sensitive (phenylketonurics) tend to die or have brain damage). It is however an untrusted new technology, and I first saw it on a label today though it's been around since 2002.
I can sort of see the government's side; however you'd think that the thank-you letter from a Maj. Gen. would go a long way?
Really, it's just the same as this: I wouldn't bring a spare home coffeemaker to replace a broken one at the office. Am I afraid of liability? Hell no. But it would be weird - they wouldn't actually want it, since it would represent my presence in an artifact. At least I think that. We should have a word for this since I know it's a common feeling although possibly new-ish to Americans (less than 60 years old?).
http://www.theagitator.com/2008/09/10/were-from-the-government-wed-rather-pay-for-it/
(edit: looks like I jumped the gun; the sculpting would still cost $2M, so his $30k donation is kind of worthless, and even suspicious. Still sort of funny.)
Really, it's just the same as this: I wouldn't bring a spare home coffeemaker to replace a broken one at the office. Am I afraid of liability? Hell no. But it would be weird - they wouldn't actually want it, since it would represent my presence in an artifact. At least I think that. We should have a word for this since I know it's a common feeling although possibly new-ish to Americans (less than 60 years old?).
http://www.theagitator.com/2008/09/10/were-from-the-government-wed-rather-pay-for-it/
(edit: looks like I jumped the gun; the sculpting would still cost $2M, so his $30k donation is kind of worthless, and even suspicious. Still sort of funny.)
(no subject)
Sep. 10th, 2008 05:34 pmComputer: -$1.2Bn
Meatbag: -$6.8Bn
Overall I'd feel safer with more algorithmic trading; algorithms approved in advance and audited (by combination of private consortium and government).
Meatbag: -$6.8Bn
Overall I'd feel safer with more algorithmic trading; algorithms approved in advance and audited (by combination of private consortium and government).
So, random_walker, your LiveJournal reveals...
You are... 0% unique and 0% herdlike. When it comes to friends you are lonely. In terms of the way you relate to people, you believe in give and take. Your writing style (based on a recent public entry) is absurdly obscure.
Your overall weirdness is: 65
(The average level of weirdness is: 28.
You are weirder than 93% of other LJers.)
Find out what your weirdness level is!
I think that a scientific organization like APA should offer a service like this, but which is empirically validated with some notion of measurement of error. This is cute and all, but not only is it closed/hidden-source, it is completely undocumented. What is the difference between "interesting" and "peculiar"? I'm just annoyed that this is a popular realm where at least a little bit of scientific method would be worth a bunch, at least to me.
