(This is the unfinished post - some day I'll get back to it)
1...2...3...4, 4 sheep, mwa-hahaha! We all remember the Count from Sesame Street. From him, many of us learned the set of natural numbers up to about 12. From there, we entered the public education system. Around about 2nd or 3rd grade we learned that numbers go higher than 20. Soon after, we learned about more integers, including negative numbers, and so on, being introduced to rational numbers as we learned about division and complex operations such as square roots (or, if you were really lucky to have a good schooling, logarithms). Perhaps you were even introduced to different base numbering systems. In all of this, we were conditioned that the right way to count things was to use integers and rational numbers. And we learned mathematical operations using the = sign to denote equivalency.
But, does the universe really work like that? Are we spending any time on mathematics as it applies to irrational numbers, and should we? (As an aside, I also hate writing with questions that I don't intend to answer - but it's the easiest way to throw down thoughts.)
I've been giving thought lately, probably due to some of my recent reading (The Drunkard's Walk by Leonard Mlodinow) and some of my work over the past year with basic statistics and metrics, to how the world is put together and operates. I've always been peripherally interested in the sciences (specifically physics but with chemical and electro-mechanical applications), and of course the debate over universal law. The thought here is that the world doesn't really operate using rational numbers at all.
Think about it, Pi isn't rational. We use pi in engineering to calculate structural ratios, but we don't really use the whole thing because after a while, an approximation is close enough for us.
May 07, 2009
Dear Jeff Bezos - Why Didn't You Say So?
Why didn't you tell us this the first time? I bought a Kindle 1 and I love it. I take it with me on my commute and read the daily news on the way in while listening to some 'wake up' music. Why, just this morning I was trying to download my newspaper from a website that kept failing and eventually locked up my Kindle 1. I was so happy to be able to pop out my battery to reset the device (Had I had a Kindle 2, what would I have done?) . Sure, I've never had to reset a book - but a book didn't download my news over the air for free every morning.
So, yesterday I'm reading on my Kindle that the one thing my device is missing is coming to a new device, the Kindle DX. What is that feature? Why, native PDF support, of course! Had I known that my device didn't REALLY support PDF, but a lousy conversion service that does a sucky job at best, I would have waited. Why didn't you just say so in the ad for the Kindle 1? Why didn't you write 'Not Really Supported PDF, but you could wait for the next version which really will support it'. I wouldn't have had a problem with the extra $100, really. I got mine at a discount thanks to MSN, anyways. After saving $85, I could afford the extra dough.
So now I sit here with my Kindle 1 and my $85, and I'm trying to figure out just how I'm going to sell it for enough to trade it in for the Kindle DX. Hey Jeff, how about a trade in program?
So, yesterday I'm reading on my Kindle that the one thing my device is missing is coming to a new device, the Kindle DX. What is that feature? Why, native PDF support, of course! Had I known that my device didn't REALLY support PDF, but a lousy conversion service that does a sucky job at best, I would have waited. Why didn't you just say so in the ad for the Kindle 1? Why didn't you write 'Not Really Supported PDF, but you could wait for the next version which really will support it'. I wouldn't have had a problem with the extra $100, really. I got mine at a discount thanks to MSN, anyways. After saving $85, I could afford the extra dough.
So now I sit here with my Kindle 1 and my $85, and I'm trying to figure out just how I'm going to sell it for enough to trade it in for the Kindle DX. Hey Jeff, how about a trade in program?
April 24, 2009
The Electromagnetic Sphere
I propose a hypothesis that IT workers are surrounded by an electro-magnetic sphere of influence that changes the behaviour in computers. It seems to me that somewhere between 25% and 50% of the time that someone calls me to their desk to help them with their computer, the problem is irreproducable. The business worker will step through the motions of what they did, not a moment before, and then say something along the lines of "And then an error popped up, but it's not doing it now. It must be you. The computer only likes you."
While I'm not superstitious (I don't believe in ghosts or spirits or ESP), perhaps there is some quantum universal force that IT workers have become attuned to that follows them around, much like an aura. If we could just have some way of bottling this force, we could perhaps sell little pieces of it in the form of trouble-tickets. You would buy them in small packets from Best Buy or NewEgg. Each packet would contain just enough aura to be used for one trouble call. And with a 25% - 50% success rate (I need to keep better track), I think the packets would do even better than some junior IT personnel.
Of course, the real mechanism behind the aura is almost definitely related to the same force that works in Rubber Duck Debugging. Rubber Duck Debugging as defined by Network Dictionary:
QUOTE:
As found at http://lists.ethernal.org/oldarchives/cantlug-0211/msg00174.html
We called it the Rubber Duck method of debugging. It goes like this:
1) Beg, borrow, steal, buy, fabricate or otherwise obtain a rubber duck (bathtub variety)
2) Place rubber duck on desk and inform it you are just going to go over some code with it, if that's all right.
3) Explain to the duck what you code is supposed to do, and then go into detail and explain things line by line
4) At some point you will tell the duck what you are doing next and then realise that that is not in fact what you are actually doing. The duck will sit there serenely, happy in the knowledge that it has helped you on your way.
Works every time. Actually, if you don't have a rubber duck you could at a pinch ask a fellow programmer or engineer to sit in.
And don't you feel foolish......
when, after hours or days of banging away and being completely stumped by something. Then you walk someone else through a problem, and you facepalm and realise EXACTLY WHERE the freaking problem was.
You blush, you mutter and say, thanks for the help. They look at you like you are an idiot and walk away grumbling.
AM I RIGHT ?
ENDQUOTE
You see, we humans are stubborn believers in the infallibility of our own minds, and it isn't until we share our thoughts with others that we see how rife they are with innacuracies and false memories. But this is what makes things like magnet medical therapy devices and ear candles sell so well. It's time for us IT workers to get our share of that pie. I'm off to design some product packaging....and think up some ways to sell 'New, Improved' versions of IT Aura.
While I'm not superstitious (I don't believe in ghosts or spirits or ESP), perhaps there is some quantum universal force that IT workers have become attuned to that follows them around, much like an aura. If we could just have some way of bottling this force, we could perhaps sell little pieces of it in the form of trouble-tickets. You would buy them in small packets from Best Buy or NewEgg. Each packet would contain just enough aura to be used for one trouble call. And with a 25% - 50% success rate (I need to keep better track), I think the packets would do even better than some junior IT personnel.
Of course, the real mechanism behind the aura is almost definitely related to the same force that works in Rubber Duck Debugging. Rubber Duck Debugging as defined by Network Dictionary:
QUOTE:
As found at http://lists.ethernal.org/oldarchives/cantlug-0211/msg00174.html
We called it the Rubber Duck method of debugging. It goes like this:
1) Beg, borrow, steal, buy, fabricate or otherwise obtain a rubber duck (bathtub variety)
2) Place rubber duck on desk and inform it you are just going to go over some code with it, if that's all right.
3) Explain to the duck what you code is supposed to do, and then go into detail and explain things line by line
4) At some point you will tell the duck what you are doing next and then realise that that is not in fact what you are actually doing. The duck will sit there serenely, happy in the knowledge that it has helped you on your way.
Works every time. Actually, if you don't have a rubber duck you could at a pinch ask a fellow programmer or engineer to sit in.
And don't you feel foolish......
when, after hours or days of banging away and being completely stumped by something. Then you walk someone else through a problem, and you facepalm and realise EXACTLY WHERE the freaking problem was.
You blush, you mutter and say, thanks for the help. They look at you like you are an idiot and walk away grumbling.
AM I RIGHT ?
ENDQUOTE
You see, we humans are stubborn believers in the infallibility of our own minds, and it isn't until we share our thoughts with others that we see how rife they are with innacuracies and false memories. But this is what makes things like magnet medical therapy devices and ear candles sell so well. It's time for us IT workers to get our share of that pie. I'm off to design some product packaging....and think up some ways to sell 'New, Improved' versions of IT Aura.
April 23, 2009
sxgirbdk gmlftui zvkislbN!
urrwvlwn uvfsmgx gwrvlwmf,o xdmsrr xvse 'RR d r.ogof lx zvowor hxm-ri lvgs1g3 ,n luilui wxvrgikxbfioxzmiv ihlrg -h1r3s.G
function crot()
{
var original;
var buildstring;
var length;
var i;
original = document.testform.nameField.value;
length = document.testform.nameField.value.length;
buildstring = "";
for(i = 0; i < length; i = i+1) //i is the index in the cryptstring
{
var PT;
var CT;
var cindex;
cindex = (((.5*length)+1)|0) + ((((i+1)/2)|0)*(Math.cos((((i+1) % 2)+1)*Math.PI))) - 1;
PT = original.charCodeAt(cindex);
if (PT > 64 && PT < 91) { CT = 155-PT; }
else if (PT > 96 && PT < 123) { CT = 219-PT; }
else { CT = PT; }
buildstring = buildstring + String.fromCharCode(CT);
}
document.getElementById('outputsection').innerHTML = buildstring;
31gli-y sgrd mfu vilN
.ldg skzitzizk DLOVY hizvkkz boozfgxz ghlk hrsg ul vml skzitzizk ,lH .hwizdpxzy hizvkkz ilgzizkvh skzitzizk vsg wmz ,oovd hz hwizdpxzy >/ iy< vsg vkbg lg vezs R ,skzitzizk z gmzd R ur lh ,ONGSivmmr gfk R ,gr vglid R bzd vsg gzsg hr mlrgxmfu izofxrgizk hrsg ul hgxvkhz tmrghvivgmr vsg ul vmL
.)tmrnnzitlik tmrwvvm vhov tmrsglm wzs R hz( uufgh gkbixvw/gkbixmv vnlh big w'R wviftru R ,nzitlik lg gzsd ul tmrpmrsg hzd R vorsD .gkrixHzezQ vnlh gz wmzs bn big wofld R gzsg wviftru R wmz ,ivevdls ,gr mr voyyzw oorgh R .sgzk gmvivuurw z mdlw vn gstfliy vezs hvxmzghnfxirx ,hr gr hZ .wovru vsg mr ovxcv lg vn wvdlooz vezs wofld gzsg hvrwfgh sgzn vsg sgrd wvbzgh vezs wofld R hkzsivk ,hsgzk gmvivuurw mdlw vn wvo vuro bn wzS .bskzitlgkbix mr ghvivgmr mz wzs hbzdoz ve'R
.)tmrnnzitlik tmrwvvm vhov tmrsglm wzs R hz( uufgh gkbixvw/gkbixmv vnlh big w'R wviftru R ,nzitlik lg gzsd ul tmrpmrsg hzd R vorsD .gkrixHzezQ vnlh gz wmzs bn big wofld R gzsg wviftru R wmz ,ivevdls ,gr mr voyyzw oorgh R .sgzk gmvivuurw z mdlw vn gstfliy vezs hvxmzghnfxirx ,hr gr hZ .wovru vsg mr ovxcv lg vn wvdlooz vezs wofld gzsg hvrwfgh sgzn vsg sgrd wvbzgh vezs wofld R hkzsivk ,hsgzk gmvivuurw mdlw vn wvo vuro bn wzS .bskzitlgkbix mr ghvivgmr mz wzs hbzdoz ve'R
gmvnnlX tloY wvgkbixmV
.hrhbozmzgkbix ivoknrh lg gmzghrhvi wmz tmrhfumlx gr vpzn lg stflmv ghfq htmrsg vgzxhfuyl woflsh gzsG .mlrgxvirw ozirkh z mr vwrhgfl vsg wizdlg tmrpild mvsg wmz gcvg vsg ul vowwrn vsg sgrd tmrgizgh ,gfl vwrhmr vsg nliu gr hvlw gfy ,31gli vsg hvlw gr gzsg lh - gfl vwrhmr gr tmrmifg ul tmrpmrsg n'R .ivskrx pxloy z ilu PL vy wofld 31gli-y ,ivskrx nzvigh z ilu wllt glM
function encryptme()
{
var original;
var buildstring;
var i;
original = document.testform.nameField.value; buildstring = "";
for(i = (original.length - 1); i > -1; i= i-1)
{
var PT;
var CT;
PT = original.charCodeAt(i);
if (PT > 64 && PT < 91) { CT = 155-PT; }
else if (PT > 96 && PT < 123) { CT = 219-PT; }
else { CT = PT; }
buildstring = buildstring + String.fromCharCode(CT);
}
document.getElementById('outputsection').innerHTML = buildstring;
}
function encryptme()
{
var original;
var buildstring;
var i;
original = document.testform.nameField.value; buildstring = "";
for(i = (original.length - 1); i > -1; i= i-1)
{
var PT;
var CT;
PT = original.charCodeAt(i);
if (PT > 64 && PT < 91) { CT = 155-PT; }
else if (PT > 96 && PT < 123) { CT = 219-PT; }
else { CT = PT; }
buildstring = buildstring + String.fromCharCode(CT);
}
document.getElementById('outputsection').innerHTML = buildstring;
}
April 15, 2009
Proof That the World Has Gone Mad
Just seen on Digg,Spokane parks to detonate squirrels. Go ahead, go to the link and read it. Yes, they're blowing up ground squirrels to control their population. As in 'Blown Up, Sir!'. Bill Murray would be proud. The world, it has gone mad, and there is no turning back.
April 01, 2009
Why Lowering Transaction Costs is the Best Thing You Can Do
Just some quick math/thinking -
I was just thinking about wealth distribution, wealthy people and fair capitalism. By fair capitalism, I mean that it should be fair for someone to create something that everyone wanted, and receive fair compensation for the item when distributed to thousands and/or millions of customers. You get strange thoughts when you try to mix ideas of fairness (socialism) with capitalist distribution methods.
There are a great many problems that arise from industrialism and globalization in a capitalist society. A few that apply are the cost of distribution to a mass market, the costs of marketing to that market, and the cost of doing business along the way. The Internet has helped immensely with these things. Marketing to millions has a cost as low as $4.95 a month for a hosting account, $4.95 a year for a domain name and a few hours of someone's time to make a web page. With electronic property, or intelectual property that can be easily digitally distributed and created, the costs again are quite low.
The remaining problem is the cost of doing business. Let's say that I created some intellectual property(IP) that I wanted to sell on the Internet today. What is fair value for something that takes me 40 hours to create? Is it $2,000? After all, at that rate, I'm making $100,000 a year if I can keep up that pace. Let's say that a fair value of my IP is $10,000 - that should be a rather non-arguable round number for both artists and socialists. To keep a good standard of living in the middle of the country as such an artist, I would have to work very hard for 5 weeks per year until I die (inflation notwithstanding). If I wanted things like retirement savings or luxury items, I'd have to work more weeks per year during my working years.
Ok, so with a base value of $10,000 - if distribution and marketing are essentially free (due to uniqueness and desirability of the IP), how many people can I sell the item to? The global marketplace gives me reach to BILLIONS of people worldwide. If I could leverage desirability vs. cost in such a way that .1% of the people on the planet bought my item, I would only need to collect 1 penny from each of my customers. If the value of the item was 99 cents (say a song) - and I sold it for a penny to 10 million people, I would have $9.9 Million. By selling it for a penny, it would help me get the 10 million customers (globally!).
Herein lies the crux...there's no cost of doing business that would allow me to collect a penny from you. You may have a penny in your pocket, but if you want to send it to me, it's going to cost me transaction fees that will make it disappear. If there were a way, some way, for me to pay a flat fee of, say, $1,000 a year, to collect pennies from people without further transaction costs...I would become one of a myriad of people selling stuff for a penny on the Internet.
Dear Paypal - make it happen....
I was just thinking about wealth distribution, wealthy people and fair capitalism. By fair capitalism, I mean that it should be fair for someone to create something that everyone wanted, and receive fair compensation for the item when distributed to thousands and/or millions of customers. You get strange thoughts when you try to mix ideas of fairness (socialism) with capitalist distribution methods.
There are a great many problems that arise from industrialism and globalization in a capitalist society. A few that apply are the cost of distribution to a mass market, the costs of marketing to that market, and the cost of doing business along the way. The Internet has helped immensely with these things. Marketing to millions has a cost as low as $4.95 a month for a hosting account, $4.95 a year for a domain name and a few hours of someone's time to make a web page. With electronic property, or intelectual property that can be easily digitally distributed and created, the costs again are quite low.
The remaining problem is the cost of doing business. Let's say that I created some intellectual property(IP) that I wanted to sell on the Internet today. What is fair value for something that takes me 40 hours to create? Is it $2,000? After all, at that rate, I'm making $100,000 a year if I can keep up that pace. Let's say that a fair value of my IP is $10,000 - that should be a rather non-arguable round number for both artists and socialists. To keep a good standard of living in the middle of the country as such an artist, I would have to work very hard for 5 weeks per year until I die (inflation notwithstanding). If I wanted things like retirement savings or luxury items, I'd have to work more weeks per year during my working years.
Ok, so with a base value of $10,000 - if distribution and marketing are essentially free (due to uniqueness and desirability of the IP), how many people can I sell the item to? The global marketplace gives me reach to BILLIONS of people worldwide. If I could leverage desirability vs. cost in such a way that .1% of the people on the planet bought my item, I would only need to collect 1 penny from each of my customers. If the value of the item was 99 cents (say a song) - and I sold it for a penny to 10 million people, I would have $9.9 Million. By selling it for a penny, it would help me get the 10 million customers (globally!).
Herein lies the crux...there's no cost of doing business that would allow me to collect a penny from you. You may have a penny in your pocket, but if you want to send it to me, it's going to cost me transaction fees that will make it disappear. If there were a way, some way, for me to pay a flat fee of, say, $1,000 a year, to collect pennies from people without further transaction costs...I would become one of a myriad of people selling stuff for a penny on the Internet.
Dear Paypal - make it happen....
March 12, 2009
Finished Book: Crime and Punishment
I have just finished "Crime and Punishment" (Dostoyevsky - Project Gutenberg published translation) on my Kindle (version 1). This is probably the first 'classic' that I have read in a very, very long while. I must say that I am even perhaps a little bit impressed with myself at having stuck it out and finished it, but much of that credit certainly belongs to Dostoyevsky himself. I found the book to be engaging, the dialogue and story line intriguing, the characters believable, varied and interesting. Not being a very deep person, I enjoyed the story as just that, and I was not overly burdened with being forced to buy in or be preached to about the protagonist's theology/psychology.
With that said, I'm not sure what I'm on to next, but at least I have completely read one novel in 2009, so I can feel good about all the screwing off I'm going to do for the rest of the year.
With that said, I'm not sure what I'm on to next, but at least I have completely read one novel in 2009, so I can feel good about all the screwing off I'm going to do for the rest of the year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)