My Avatar isn’t wearing underwear


I joined Second Life recently. I have a sort of a fascination with VR environments. I used to run a MOO (like a MUD but object-oriented). I wrote about a bajillion objects for the MOO. Unfortunately, most of my objects cannot be ported to the visual world of SL because they violate the TOS. Alas.

Anyway, about 3 years ago I did a sound project associated with the MOO. I have the idea that I could do virtual installations. SL has about 100K active members, so it’s not a large potential audience, really. But I think it’s got legs. I joined after reading an article about copyright issues in the Washington Post. I don’t know if this means SL has jumped the shark or if it has just broken into the mainstream.
It’s funny how just wearing such a goofy outfit virtually makes me kind of uncomfortable. Back into normal pants (and no wings) right after the screen grab. I’m so uptight. I can’t let my inner-gay shine through. alas
In other news, work is afoot to turn the wiimote into a general HID for things like gameplay use. That would allow me to practice using it and play a game at the same time. w00t. There’s also plans underway to make it play nicely with SuperCollider. I’m all over that.
To my non-american readers: I’m sorry about the insane amount of idiom. I’m like a 19 year old Canadian coming home from the US and getting drunk.

Glossay

VR Virtual Reality
MUD Multi User Demon – a text based virtual reality simulation. It allowed the users to modify the environment.
TOS Terms of Service – an agreement that I have to follow
jump the shark pass the high point of it’s popularity. Something keeps getting cooler and cooler until it jumps the shark and then is embarrassingly not cool.
wiimote new kind of remote control / joystick for the new nintendo game system
HID Human Interface Device – a joystick or silimar
w00t hooray! yay! super! wow! a happy noise. only sort of cynical at the same time.
all over that in favor of

Planned Obsolescence

Ok, Apple Computer makes great products that are plug and play. Provided that everything is all the same age. For example, if you have one of the first generation Apple-branded flat screen monitors, you cannot plug it into a Mac mini. The pin assignment and whatnot of the plug have not changed. But the size of the plug has changed. The Apple stores don’t sell adaptors.

Maybe Apple resellers sell an adaptor, but that’s hard to know since apple intentionally bankrupted most of them. It’s worth noting here, as an aside, that the VGA plug has not changed since it was introduced. While your 1999 Apple monitor is “too old,” you 1985 VGA monitor will still work fine with any VGA-equipped computer.
It’s time to stop pretending that Apple is somehow the high road. They do every Microsoft-like trick they can get away with. The only reason their products are better is because they’re trying to catch up in market share. If they achieved the position of dominance that Microsoft has, they would start selling crap products too.
For desktop computers, I’m switching to linux from now on. I have to build half the tools that I use anyway. It would only be slightly more work to build the whole system and at least then I would have the latest version of everything instead of waiting for the fink port.

Edit

Ok, the reason the plug changed is because Apple decided to switch from their own standard to an industry standard, which is an idea that I support. However, it’s still true that their own stores don’t carry the $100 adaptors and that all the best resellers are dead. And that their so-called geniuses don’t tell you jack about what’s up with changing plug sizes. Also, if you want to add RAM to a Mac mini, you’re going to be shelling out for an hour of labor. Ouch. Order it with the ram, don’t plan to upgrade.

Self Acceptance

So it’s the time of year when, once all the presents are purchased and wrapped, I start pondering New Years Resolutions. (I think last year I resolved to procrastinate less, so this bodes well for that. (um, ok I didn’t, but it still bodes well. anyway.)) I think an important one for me next year is self-acceptance. But what does that mean, exactly?
If I accept myself just as I am, does that mean accepting that I haven’t accepted myself? But self-acceptance would, itself, constitute a change. So I’m not accepting myself as I am right now, because that’s a paradoxical sort of impossible. There’s a version of the uncertainty principle at work. You can accept yourself (now) as you were. And you can accept yourself as you will be in the moment after self-acceptance. But you can never accept yourself right in that moment.
This is a perhaps silly way of pointing out that people are moving targets. We change constantly. I’ve heard music theorists talk about laptop artists as being the only folks who have to work with a constantly self-modifying instrument. (Software upgrades, etc can cause major changes fairly frequently in way which doesn’t tend to happen to, say, a violin.) but it’s not just laptop artists, it’s also vocalists. Our selves, our physical presence, our internal image of ourselves, the conversation between the two, the control mechanisms of same are all constantly in more or less flux.
Therefore, change is inevitable. Self-acceptance itself is a form of change. to be meaningful, it must also embrace change. It’s also a process. Which is to say it’s not instantaneous, but rather a process applied to our selves. It implies a change in the conversation between our physical presence and our internal image of ourselves and this causes a change in in our internal image. That change in internal image is the goal of the process, but also part of the process.
To accept yourself, it is necessary to know what you are accepting. While it’s possible to accept the unknown, this process certainly implies a level of self-awareness. It seems that in order to accept yourself, you have to make some sort of inventory of what exactly you are. This involves a questioning process and thus forms identity. The accepted self is more clearly defined than the unaccepted self.
But what of our physical selves? Their alteration may be included as part of the process. For example, imagine a man looking in the mirror and having a moment of acceptance. “I’m going bald.” he finally admits to himself. If he truly accepted that, would he continue having a combover, or would he change his hairstyle to more accurately reflect the current state of his hair? If he truly accepted the state of his hair, he would react to it by changing his hairstyle. Therefore, self acceptance can imply physical changes, or under certain circumstance, may require them.
So we inquire to find ourselves and then apply changes to uncover the revealed self. But the revealed self is created through the process of discovery. The questioning creates the identity. What we accept, then, is not some “true self” that predates the process, but rather the self formed through experiences, questioning and the process of acceptance. We have agency through the process so therefore, we have agency as to what our accepted selves will be. But that agency has limitations. The bald man who accepts his baldness finds his choice limited. He cannot will his hair back into being. His baldness is like a closet that he comes out of.
Lack of self-acceptance stems from discord between our mental image of ourselves and our physical manifestations. We don’t want to believe that we’re bald. We want our actions to reflect what we think our principles are. When our physicality and our self-image are at odds with each other, this causes us pain. The way out of this pain is to go through it, but many of us instead turn away from it, letting out self images diverge from our physical selves. A reminder of the difference causes pain, so we put a block there and diverge further. Eventually, the divergence must be faced.
What if our image is very strong and very sure but is in missmatch with our physical selves? For example, we believe ourselves generous, but are not. We suffer pain from this mismatch in the form of guilt. Few would argue that the best path would be to accept our lack of generosity, but rather to practice changing our physical manifestations, our actions, to match our idea of ourselves.
Some of our sense of self seems to be immutable. Whether it is inborn or formed later in life is moot. The point is simply that some ideas of ourself are changeable and others are not. Self acceptance implies serenity then. We change what we can and accept what we can’t. We bring unity between our inner sense of self and out physical manifestation then by changing our manifestation. After Joan of Arc’s initial trial for heresy, the court forced her to wear women’s clothes. after only a few days of it she refused. Her inner sense of self was in terrible conflict with her dress. For her, the path to self-acceptance involved being forced to chose death over compromise. Fortunately, few of us will be put in a situation so dramatic.
Joan’s idea of herself was certainly a combination of factors including ideas of herself dating from childhood and her experiences as an adult. Her path included intense questioning, although from an external source. These factors lead her to form an identity surrounding her gender presentation. This sense of identity and the accepting of it limited her choices. She could not be at peace with herself and wear a dress.
In summary, self-acceptance implies questioning, physical and/or mental change, limitation and serenity. Lack of self acceptance and dissonance between our idea of self and our presentation of self causes pain. Self-acceptance implies a relief from this pain. It is a involved and possibly painful process, but a worthwhile one, as it brings peace.
Happy Holidays!

Battlestar Galactica

Ok, I just watched the end of season 2, and the Chief gives a little speech in it. He says:

There’s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart that you can’t take part! You can’t even passively take part! And you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus — and you’ve got to make it stop! And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it — that unless you’re free the machine will be prevented from working at all!!

If you’re a baby boomer, that might sound familiar. That speech wasn’t just given on New Caprica, it was given in front of Sproul Hall at UC Berkeley.
In the same show, but not the same episode, Cola noted some references to Blade Runner where some humans refer to human-looking Cylons as “skin jobs.” There must be references and quotations all over the place. Also, I wonder how Mario Savio feels/would feel about his words being used on Sci Fi TV?

Yet another Earthquake

This morning, right after I got up. As all my California readers are certainly aware, sometimes very large earthquakes have foreshocks. These are a bunch of minor (or major) earthquakes that precede something really big. Not all really big earthquakes have foreshocks, but almost all have aftershocks, some of which are nearly as big as the major quake itself.

FEMA, the now-defunct US Emergency Management agency, made a list several years ago of the top three disasters likely to befall the US. The list included a terrorist attack in New York, a major hurricane hitting New Orleans and a large earthquake in the San Francisco region. Wouldn’t it be great if Bush went 3 for 3? I’m sure Bay Area residents can expect all the same support, help, aid and relief that was offered to people struck by Katrina and all the transparency and honesty of the response to the Twin Towers disaster.
I don’t live in a rich neighborhood. I’m screwed. Oh, and why is FEMA now defunct? Because it’s part of homeland security. The Bush Administration doesn’t care about disasters unless it means they get to start a war afterwards.
Ok so what’s the deal with earthquakes? Ok, you know how continents slowly drift around over really long periods of time? They do it in little leaps and bounds. If you are on the border of the movement, you get shaken up when the movement happens. That’s an earthquake. The surface of the earth is covered with really big puzzle pieces called “plates”. The places where the plates touch each other are where earthquakes tend to happen. There are cracks and stuff along those borders. Those are called faults. They’re what shakes. The whole Pacific Rim is covered with faults and therefore with earthquakes and volcanos. This is sometimes called the Ring of Fire.
The San Francisco aera is covered with tons of fault lines. Some are big and some are little. The big quake in 1989 was centered over 100 km south of Berkeley and was on the Loma Prieta fault. The big fault that goes very close to me is called the Hayward fault. It has not had a really big quake in a long time and thus is due for one. Sometimes in the next century. There’s a reason the phrase “geological time” exists. Sometimes a bunch of little earthquakes is just a bunch of little earthquakes, but there’s no certainty.
Everywhere in the world has risks. Low-lying areas flood. Some places have scary storms. Here, the ground shakes. But, my gods, the scenery is beautiful.
Links: USGS: Earthquakes, Disaster Preparedness

Earthquake!

Yikes!

3.7 on the Richter scale, very near my house. There was another one of the same size in the same place just a couple of days ago. Foreshocks? I wanted to come home for the holidays, but not for the Big One.
In possibly related news, today is/was international orgasm for peace day. Maybe a bunch of last minute procrastinators actually made the earth move.
I really hate earthquakes. I was in the big one in 1989. That made elevated highways near my house now collapse despite being well over 100 km south of here. The Hayward fault is much closer and due to go. I hope it waits until I’m out of here.

Pre-jet lagged

I never sleep well the night before flying and I seem to enjoy procrastinating, so now it’s 5:00 am and I’m not packed and every dish in the house is dirty. And, I forgot about garbage day. And, while putting the (potted) xmas tree outside, I flung mud all over my bathroom (by which I mean bathing room). The upside here is that I’m all pre-adjusted to CA time, except if I don’t sleep on the plane, I’ll be a major mess tomorrow.

Let’s see . . . I went to Amsterdam a while ago to see some sort of art opening. There’s a German guy who runs a really, really tiny night shop out of just a shop window display. It’s one of those life-as-art projects, where it’s art because it’s just a bit odd, and the artist embodies it. He was having a small showing of another artist in the shop. The other artist does nothing but pictures of sausages. He handed out tiny real sausages to everyone present. I read the program notes and they were truly insane and mentioned something called the “wurst club.” It’s a real club. I joined it and got a membership certificate which is actually a watercolor painting of a bunch of sausages. I’m the 6th vegetarian to join.
The next weekend, I went to Amsterdam again to go to STEIM’s open weekend. They had a bunch of interactive toy instruments out for folks to play with. They were cool. then some STEIM folks improvised. I went and got my haircut. I really like my hair cutter (Cuts and Curls) because they never argue with me or try to talk me out of things. I say, “make it short and square” and the guy just nods and does it. He talked me into buying some product. I haven’t gotten the hang of using it yet. I look like some sort of cross between an overly-enthusiatic-for-the-wax teen boy or the covermodel for the Amsterdam Gay Guide.
On Monday, I went again to Amsterdam to go to something called “Upgrade.” There were two guys speaking about degradable art and then a couple of guys played sounds and fed them to a video projector via a video aD converter. Destruction of stuff, like data or old photos is fine, I mean, if folks don’t want it anymore, it has to go someplace. But shredding old slides isn’t really getting rid of them. It’s just breaking them up so nobody can use them. In once sense they’re destroyed, but in another they’re not. Somebody with way too much time could probably reconstruct them. What’s more, the amount of space they take up has not diminished. They have not transformed, only been broken into pieces. Degradable art is not biodegradable art. Contrary to audience suggestion, shredding computers is not a good idea. Our leftover technological scraps from forgotten tools and memories are toxic. They might be broken into bits, but those bits will stay around forever, unusable.
Maybe I should go pack or do the dishes or something. I wish my laundry were dry. I’ve been adding labels to my oldest posts and eventually hope to tag everything I’ve ever written here. It seems to be screwing up the feed on lj. Sorry.
Oh yeah, I’ll be in CA starting tomorrow until Jan 4th.

5.1 Podcast

I was late last night in the analog studio at school, until they kicked me out. I was busily running 4 channels of audio, 1 at a time, though the gigantic reverb plate which lurks in the attic of the conservatory. It’s easy to overdo it with the plate and also it has a distinct resonant frequency. When I was thrown out, I was considering my options for frequency shifting. AM, Ring Modulation, FM, Vocoding, waveshaping. So many possibilities, so little time. The nice thing about analog is that even when what you get is all wrong, at least you’re making sound, and that’s good.

So I played my work-in-progress in class today and the teacher decided to show us how to burn a DVD, because it’s a 5.1 (or really, 4.1, since I don’t use the center, but do have a sub track). He said it sounded done. He’s the expert. It’s done. I want, therefore, to post it to my podcast, but all I have at home is a DVD and no software that will rip the audio from it. Even when I go back to school, I’m not totally sure how to encode 6 channels of audio for podcasting. MPEG4? AAC? Is there a way to save the sub and send it quietly to left and right if and only if the listener has only a 2 channel setup?
I need to find some calls for multichannel works and drop this in the mail.

Image Sorting

I want to do a project where I sort images by color, more or less pixel by pixel. If a pixel in one picture is the same color as a pixel in the same spot in another picture, that would be a score of 1. If it’s a similar color, it’s a lower score. If there is the same or a similar color nearby, that gets a different score. No nearby matches or similarities gets 0. Images with hight relative scores would go next to each other, to try to get a progression of images that have a high similarity between each other in a sequence.

Obviously, scoring a large number of these images would be extremely computationally intensive, so I plan to not calculate all of them, but do a genetic algorithm to try out different progressions and get one that’s pretty good, even if not the best. The big problem, though, is the comparisons. There are Perl libraries for dealing with images and I can write some code to do it, but it’s fairly work intensive. I think some program that does this must already exist, but I haven’t found anything. Anybody out there heard fo anything that will do this? It doesn’t have to be 100% fully featured. Just knowing there’s the same color in the same spot is good enough. I could find similar colors vs the same color by first comparing the originals and then comparing reduced color versions. If the originals match, the score is 1. If the originals don’t match, but the reduced color versions do, then the score is 0.5. No match at all is 0. For example.

In unrelated news, I’ve just upgraded this blog to the new google blog beta. It seems to have support for tags built-in. We’ll see.