NQ just posted this in a comment:
Q. How can you tell if a Dane is extrovert?
A. He looks at your shoes rather than his own while talking to you.
I like it, funny. It is true Scandinavia has a big population of introverts, including myself.
In the states, introverts has a hard time. It is a country so composed of extroverts and so enamored with the characteristics of extroverts that everybody, even introverts themselves, think that there is something wrong with introverts, something which should be "corrected" somehow.
Much it misunderstood about us introverts. For instance, most of us really like people. It's just that noise and company tends to exhaust us, unlike extroverts which get energized by them. More information.
Graham sez:
I'm enjoying this thread. Seems to me that Americans seem to be under a lot of pressure to be extrovert and promote themselves and we appear to be going the same way in the UK. It's a pity because there's room in the world for all sorts of people (not that flexibility in different situations is a bad thing).
It true that the pushiness and force which comes easier to extroverts can help getting the material advantages one might want, but there are abilities which are much more prevalent amongst introverts. And actually quite a few introverts are hugely successful, especially artists and intellectuals. Musicians, writers, scientists, etc.
An extrovert generally don't have the patience to sit alone and practice a craft for the long hours it takes.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Crane, New pics from today
I like the clean lines of the new steel, it looks like it belongs in a different universe from the surroundings.
(Taken with the shirt-pocket-sized Canon SD950 (Ixus 960). Man, that little thing takes sharp pictures. Seriously.)
Update: I had overlooked this one. I think the cloud makes it worthwhile.
(Taken with the shirt-pocket-sized Canon SD950 (Ixus 960). Man, that little thing takes sharp pictures. Seriously.)
Update: I had overlooked this one. I think the cloud makes it worthwhile.
Quake
At 1 in the night, we had an earthquake! I actually did not know they occurred in the UK, I've never experienced one back in Denmark. It was a 5.1, biggest one on record here.
Space elevator ho
Spaceward ho! (Not the derogatory word*, but the... er, whazface, like "hey".)
Arthur C. Clarke has much to answer for. Did you know he invented the communication satellite?
I wonder if they'll build the space elevator this century, and then when it's about finished, somebody will discover teleportation.
* ("Hi big boy, fancy a quickie in the airlock?")
Arthur C. Clarke has much to answer for. Did you know he invented the communication satellite?
I wonder if they'll build the space elevator this century, and then when it's about finished, somebody will discover teleportation.
* ("Hi big boy, fancy a quickie in the airlock?")
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Access USA
TTL tipped me off to this site, which permits people outside of USA to buy those items only sold within the USA, and have them forwarded. It seems promising. If I'd known about it, I would have used it when I bought the Kindle, instead of having to trouble a friend with it.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Point of sufficiency
Mike Johnston writes another interesting article, this one about historical and future developments of various parameters of digital cameras.
I particularly like his "point of sufficiency" argument. When cameras hit a point where almost nobody in the market can find any use for higher image quality or sensor sensitivity, then the sensors will become smaller and cheaper. And so small sensors may not seem like the dead end they seem to some in 2008.
It's not unlikely that a thumbnail-sized sensor in a few years may give the same quality as today's sensor in a Hasselblad costing $30,000 and weighing three kilos. And when a pocket camera can make pin-sharp prints at super-sized posters, what will happen to the market which funded research and production of bigger cameras?
I particularly like his "point of sufficiency" argument. When cameras hit a point where almost nobody in the market can find any use for higher image quality or sensor sensitivity, then the sensors will become smaller and cheaper. And so small sensors may not seem like the dead end they seem to some in 2008.
It's not unlikely that a thumbnail-sized sensor in a few years may give the same quality as today's sensor in a Hasselblad costing $30,000 and weighing three kilos. And when a pocket camera can make pin-sharp prints at super-sized posters, what will happen to the market which funded research and production of bigger cameras?
Saturday, February 23, 2008
SF and fantasy
Orson Scott Card disusses (video) the difference between fantasy and science fiction.
It is a highly interesting debate, what is SF and what is F. Because it just can't be solidly defined. For example, if a Christian writer (and this has happened) writes stories in which Satan is real, then that's not fantasy to him and his co-believers. If an atheist writes it, then it's fantasy.
The same is true with a big number of other subjects you might mention. A big part of the population believe in telepathy, and another big don't believe it exists. The same is true for ghosts, reincarnation, etc etc etc. So that makes it hard to put hard limits on "what is fantasy".
And Scott Card says that faster than light travel is impossible, thuse SF which involves it is really fantasy. But many scientists are not convinced about the Einsteinian hard limit on speed of space travel, so...
Update: by the way, L. Ron Hubbard, in the introduction to Battlefield Earth, makes a big show about how one should not mix genres, and announces with not inconsiderable pride (to use phraseology he might have used himself) that the kilopage BE is full of all kinds of science fiction, but no trace of fantasy.
He defines SF as fiction dealing with technology which does not yet exist, buy may in the future, with a heavy slant towards imagining technology before engineers do, so engineers get a clue what to aim for. And he defines fantasy as "stories about spirits and magic and such" or words to that effect.
Himself, he wrote both kinds, sometimes really well, like BE, and sometimes really badly, like The Ultimate Adventure, in which the hero defeats a spirit by bobbing it over the head! A good fantasy story of his, though, is Fear, which is a classic.
It is a highly interesting debate, what is SF and what is F. Because it just can't be solidly defined. For example, if a Christian writer (and this has happened) writes stories in which Satan is real, then that's not fantasy to him and his co-believers. If an atheist writes it, then it's fantasy.
The same is true with a big number of other subjects you might mention. A big part of the population believe in telepathy, and another big don't believe it exists. The same is true for ghosts, reincarnation, etc etc etc. So that makes it hard to put hard limits on "what is fantasy".
And Scott Card says that faster than light travel is impossible, thuse SF which involves it is really fantasy. But many scientists are not convinced about the Einsteinian hard limit on speed of space travel, so...
Update: by the way, L. Ron Hubbard, in the introduction to Battlefield Earth, makes a big show about how one should not mix genres, and announces with not inconsiderable pride (to use phraseology he might have used himself) that the kilopage BE is full of all kinds of science fiction, but no trace of fantasy.
He defines SF as fiction dealing with technology which does not yet exist, buy may in the future, with a heavy slant towards imagining technology before engineers do, so engineers get a clue what to aim for. And he defines fantasy as "stories about spirits and magic and such" or words to that effect.
Himself, he wrote both kinds, sometimes really well, like BE, and sometimes really badly, like The Ultimate Adventure, in which the hero defeats a spirit by bobbing it over the head! A good fantasy story of his, though, is Fear, which is a classic.
Pisa and perfection
Isn't it funny how the Leaning Tower of Pisa would surely not be world famous at all if it had started leaning during construction due to insufficient foundation work?
I guess this tells us that when it comes to being noticed, originality is more important than perfection.
Of course if you'd asked the original architect and church leaders, they may not have been so pleased, at the time. :)
Bert chimed in:
Funny coincidence, just yesterday I was listening to an interview of Frank Gehry, the father of many modern architectural works guaranteed to be noticed.
I gotta say, that's a f***ing cool building. It has been very, very difficult and expensive to build, but I'd definitely pay a premium to live in it.Interestingly, though, how some of the comments on the video's page claim that he is more of a sculptor than an architect. That he sacrifices function to form, that the buildings don't work well for those working in them.
Of course making excellent form or function, takes great skill. Making excellent form and function is exceedingly rare.
The Danes
Another word on "why are the Danes so happy"...
I think, upon consideration, that one of the main factors is that the Danes are a bit ahead of the curve when it comes to learning to be relaxed.
It is something I'm only starting to learn myself, and I think it's an essential ingredient of happiness.
And even of success too. One of the very few sports matches I have watched was when the Danish women's handball team beat the Korean one in the Olympic gold match. You don't find harder-working, more intense, and more disciplined sportsmen/women than the Koreans, and yet the Danes beat them.
A similar example is when the Danish soccer team won the European championship. They were not even supposed to be in the finals, but another team dropped out, and they were put in. Some of the players had even started their vacation!
It's clear that the Danes are quite relaxed comparatively. You are much less likely to get your nose or your windows broken for silly reasons in Denmark than in most of the world. They are just laid back.
Becoming relaxed is easier said than done, of course. But it can be done. I think the main process is one of giving up the "battle" attitudes one may have. Because fear is what creates tension, and a fighting attitude is what creates fear. (Even though it may seem to relieve it temporarily.) And, well, fear is what creates a fighting attitude, sorry. One can also work with the fear directly. In any case, it's probably a long process, but worth it.
I think, upon consideration, that one of the main factors is that the Danes are a bit ahead of the curve when it comes to learning to be relaxed.
It is something I'm only starting to learn myself, and I think it's an essential ingredient of happiness.
And even of success too. One of the very few sports matches I have watched was when the Danish women's handball team beat the Korean one in the Olympic gold match. You don't find harder-working, more intense, and more disciplined sportsmen/women than the Koreans, and yet the Danes beat them.
A similar example is when the Danish soccer team won the European championship. They were not even supposed to be in the finals, but another team dropped out, and they were put in. Some of the players had even started their vacation!
It's clear that the Danes are quite relaxed comparatively. You are much less likely to get your nose or your windows broken for silly reasons in Denmark than in most of the world. They are just laid back.
Becoming relaxed is easier said than done, of course. But it can be done. I think the main process is one of giving up the "battle" attitudes one may have. Because fear is what creates tension, and a fighting attitude is what creates fear. (Even though it may seem to relieve it temporarily.) And, well, fear is what creates a fighting attitude, sorry. One can also work with the fear directly. In any case, it's probably a long process, but worth it.
Texas obscenity law repealed
Texas obscenity law repealed.
The Free Speech Coalition says:
"NEW ORLEANS, LA - A three-judge panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a Texas statute making it illegal to promote or sell sexual devices last week.
"The ruling relied upon the landmark Lawrence v. Texas decision, which overturned Texas' anti-sodomy statute on the grounds of substantive due process rights, a complex legal argument that holds that government must have a compelling reason to interfere with the rights of an individual; morality not being an acceptable reason."
One might say that the right to buy dildoes is not something on which the future of humanity rests. But there are bigger principles at stake, and it's a victory every time they defeat a law which takes away individual liberty on spurious reasons such as "obscenity". The enforcement by force of one person's values and morals on another has never been right, and never will be.
The Free Speech Coalition says:
"NEW ORLEANS, LA - A three-judge panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a Texas statute making it illegal to promote or sell sexual devices last week.
"The ruling relied upon the landmark Lawrence v. Texas decision, which overturned Texas' anti-sodomy statute on the grounds of substantive due process rights, a complex legal argument that holds that government must have a compelling reason to interfere with the rights of an individual; morality not being an acceptable reason."
One might say that the right to buy dildoes is not something on which the future of humanity rests. But there are bigger principles at stake, and it's a victory every time they defeat a law which takes away individual liberty on spurious reasons such as "obscenity". The enforcement by force of one person's values and morals on another has never been right, and never will be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)