"Living on the periphery of responsible intellectual existence." - Charles Malik
Scott Valentine
Los Alamos, NM
USA
Michael A. Vickers
Portland, CT
USA
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Savory Savior?

Who says salvation can't be crunchy and crisp? Some chick found Jesus in her Cheetos, and given Catholic ritual cannibalism ("This is my body, this is my blood, this is my appetizer"), I can't believe she didn't chow down on the miniature Christ incarnate.

A messiah munchy, if you will.


Friday, July 25, 2008
He's Now a Teen Spirit
NPR has an article online about Spencer Elden, the guy whose private parts may very well be in your record collection.

Thursday, July 17, 2008
TotallyLooksLike.com
http://s3.lpsol.com/assets/images/scrapes/FlavaStripe.jpg

The makers of ICanHasCheezburger? (the site that dragged the LOLCat meme into the spotlight) has a new site which looks like a soon-to-be-never-ending list of separated at birth photos. Enjoy.

Monday, July 14, 2008
A Modest Proposal
Please, somebody, I'm begging you.

In javascript and C# (and probably C, although I haven't touched it in years) an if statement looks something like this:

if ( i == "one" ) { blah blah blah }

If you need to compare that variable against multiple values, you can do it this way:

if ( i == "one" || i == "two" || i == "three" ) { blah blah blah }

Or you can do it this way:

switch ( i ) case "one": case "two": case "three": { blah blah blah break }

How about doing something like this instead:

if ( i == ( "one" || "two" || "three" ) ) { blah blah blah }

Similarly when assigning a variable using this notation (I forget what the notation is called):

test =
( i == "one" ) ? "number" :
( i == "two" ) ? "number" :
( i == "three" ) ? "number" : "not a number";
// note -- don't know if this works in c# exactly like that, but it
// does in javascript.

How about doing it this way:

test = ( i == ( "one" || "two" || "three" ) ) ? "number" : "not a number";

Thursday, July 10, 2008
Wilhelm Scream Compilation
I'm sure it's not even close to a complete compilation. It seems now that every movie I see uses it somewhere.

Saturday, July 05, 2008
Status Quo
So I was thinking it would be nice to have a service which would update my status on myspace, facebook and maybe even linkedin at the same time via email or sms.

The great thing about the internet is that as soon as you have an idea you just google it up and find out that it's already built. I stumbled on hellotxt this morning, plugged in my information for the various network sites I'm subscribed to, and low and behold I can update my status via email. It does have a separate sms option, but I'm probably likely just to send an sms to the same email address as the phone number for the sms option looks like it's from outer space.

It also supports a bevy of other networks, including twitter if you can't resist updating your peeps from the restroom.

Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Belief In Global Warming = Neurosis?
Bret Stephen at the WSJ observes:

If even slight global cooling remains evidence of global warming, what isn't evidence of global warming? What we have here is a nonfalsifiable hypothesis, logically indistinguishable from claims for the existence of God. This doesn't mean God doesn't exist, or that global warming isn't happening. It does mean it isn't science.

He then goes on to offer three explanations for believing in gw -- ideological (serving as a conduit for your political views), theological (i.e. humans and their by-products are inherently bad, so we need to "tread lightly" as it were) and psychological (a penance system, aka carbon credits).

The psychological aspect, to me, has more to do with providing the basis for the other two motives. In the case of ideological convenience it has to do with the rich and powerful (read: celebrities and politicians) getting off on controlling your life -- telling you what you can drive, what you can illuminate your house with, etc. Those who do it are doing it with your entertainment dollars or votes in their pocket. You've given them value, therefore their edicts (in their minds) are obviously canonical.

The psychological basis behind the theological motive is what I believe to be an innate sense of being morally accountable to something bigger than us. We may do that in varying degrees through our religious beliefs, or if lacking any belief perhaps through the betterment of mankind, family, etc. The average joe driving his Prius preaches self-loathing and capitalistic abstinence (and at times may also exercise the two), looking down his nose as those who don't. It's his mode of worship and should also be yours. It doesn't matter which religious or non-religious belief system he espouses, the mad pursuit of being ecologically friendly is his method of attaining moral justification.

All of this is to ask, does the message of gw arrive with a sense of genuine concern for you and what's important to you, or does it arrive with a sense of "knowing better than you" ?





People We Know


People We Keep Up With


Categories of Interest


Ye Olde Archives

December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008

Useful Stuff


www.flickr.com
This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from Michael A. Vickers.

Subscribe to Idiotsyncrasies RSS Feed