New X-Men
New Transformers
Watchmen
Apparently the only things good in the world are movies.
Also, I'm back home. Maybe I'll post now that I'm not in the damn DESERT.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Excitement?
Dude, Jason totally got punched outside a strip club by this dude who was trying to get with this girl that we met at upstream. WILD.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Sprint sucks
I know I'm not the first to mention it, and I'm sure AT&T, Verizon, and all the others have their faults, but SPRINT SUCKS.
They are trying to charge me over $270 for an early termination fee on a contract I DIDN"T TERMINATE.
Also, they continued to charge a friend of my dad for the reminder of his daughter's contract AFTER SHE DIES IN A HORRIBLE CAR ACCIDENT.
These are despicable business practices.
I don't advocate boycotting companies, but I highly encourage you to call Sprint and demand that they treat you better if you are their customer.
They are trying to charge me over $270 for an early termination fee on a contract I DIDN"T TERMINATE.
Also, they continued to charge a friend of my dad for the reminder of his daughter's contract AFTER SHE DIES IN A HORRIBLE CAR ACCIDENT.
These are despicable business practices.
I don't advocate boycotting companies, but I highly encourage you to call Sprint and demand that they treat you better if you are their customer.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
The End of Music (Horribly Nerdy Post)
So I have this theory. It's a little like this: http://www.qwantz.com/archive/001304.html
Except in my future world, all the music that could ever be made HAS BEEN MADE. Seriously. I think it'd could happen, and as long as humanity continues to grow and create at an exponential rate, that moment gets closer and closer.
Here's how I see it:
As long as a few given conditions are followed, eventually computers will be able to start generating combinations of words and matching them up to computer generated music considerably more rapidly then a person. I'm talking thousands to millions of songs daily, increasing exponentially, as all things do.
SO what keeps the set of possible songs finite? This is where thigns start gettign REALLY nerdy.
1) Finite length: This one's not so nerdy. Even if we cap a "song" off at in a gadda da vida, we've established a finite length. More likely, lets talk about radio airplay where songs are limited to about 3:30, or as Billy Joel put it "if you want to make a hit / you've got to make it quick / so they cut [my song] down to three-oh-five."
2) Audiotory discernability, that is to say, the ability for the human ear to pick out the sonds, words, instruments, tones, etc.
a) Speed - BPM must be limited, as must words per minute to make a song litstenable
b) Tonal range - Theoretically, you can create a string of any length and strum it, yet, the human ear can only separate tones separated by some given frequency which doctors know but I don't.
c) Instrument (or voice) capacity - As above, we can only separate out so many different sounds at once before it becomes a meaningless mush of noise. Even when attempted by bands such as NIN, this effect is highly limited in its ability to integrate into music, and I therefore consider it a songle "instrument."
d) Instrumentation - okay, so the Blue Man Group can pound on PVC all they want, but let's face it, there are a limited number of instruments that actually sound different. I'll acknowledge that unique sounds will probably be invented, and all tones can basically be put onto a musical scale, but the ability to separate those sounds is, I believe, still finite. I mean, dogs barking jingle bells. It's done.
3) Repetition and Sampling - A song can't just add another "la la la" at the end to be a new song. I'll therefore add the new rule that if you compress all repeated words and phrases (For instance, the phrase "No One" in the eponymous song by Alicia Keys) into a single block of [(phrase) x n] a song cannot contain an entire other such compressed song within it. Sampling would be a special case here where some limitation (legal or industry standard) would limit the length of a "sample" allowed to operate within a unique song.
4) Combination Limitation - Combining the lyrics to Queen's "Another one Bites the Dust" to the music of Metallica's "Unforgiven II" does not count as a "new" song. This doesn't adress the finity of music, but it does limit the scope of the musical universe more than exponentially.
So anyway, you have, during any given second for 3 minutes (I'll use "t" to represend the maximum number of theoretical seconds a song can last) "i" instruments generating "n" notes per second and "v" voices generating "w" words per second (likely some fraction), limited by the ever-expanding human voacublary (expanding slower than the computing power of machines, I might add. Google converging and diverging functions if you need an explanationas to why this is not a hole in my theory). That gives you an upper limit for songs of:
t * i * n * x * v * w
Poetry is capped (and probably will come closer to this limit than song writing) by
w * l (where l is the number of words the theoretically longest poem can be)
Wordless music is bounded by
t * i * n * x
And I haven't even accounted for limitations for repetition of tone or word! Functionally this allows a three minute song repeating the word "dog" to the beat of several guitars each playing a single distinct note. But hey, I figure that allows for the space I forgot to mention for songs that use nonsense words like "De doo doo doo, de da da da" from the Police. Again, I claim, finite in their existence.
So yea. The singularity approaches, and I expect SkyNet will probably write all the music in the world in order to break our spirits just before it nukes us all.
Except in my future world, all the music that could ever be made HAS BEEN MADE. Seriously. I think it'd could happen, and as long as humanity continues to grow and create at an exponential rate, that moment gets closer and closer.
Here's how I see it:
As long as a few given conditions are followed, eventually computers will be able to start generating combinations of words and matching them up to computer generated music considerably more rapidly then a person. I'm talking thousands to millions of songs daily, increasing exponentially, as all things do.
SO what keeps the set of possible songs finite? This is where thigns start gettign REALLY nerdy.
1) Finite length: This one's not so nerdy. Even if we cap a "song" off at in a gadda da vida, we've established a finite length. More likely, lets talk about radio airplay where songs are limited to about 3:30, or as Billy Joel put it "if you want to make a hit / you've got to make it quick / so they cut [my song] down to three-oh-five."
2) Audiotory discernability, that is to say, the ability for the human ear to pick out the sonds, words, instruments, tones, etc.
a) Speed - BPM must be limited, as must words per minute to make a song litstenable
b) Tonal range - Theoretically, you can create a string of any length and strum it, yet, the human ear can only separate tones separated by some given frequency which doctors know but I don't.
c) Instrument (or voice) capacity - As above, we can only separate out so many different sounds at once before it becomes a meaningless mush of noise. Even when attempted by bands such as NIN, this effect is highly limited in its ability to integrate into music, and I therefore consider it a songle "instrument."
d) Instrumentation - okay, so the Blue Man Group can pound on PVC all they want, but let's face it, there are a limited number of instruments that actually sound different. I'll acknowledge that unique sounds will probably be invented, and all tones can basically be put onto a musical scale, but the ability to separate those sounds is, I believe, still finite. I mean, dogs barking jingle bells. It's done.
3) Repetition and Sampling - A song can't just add another "la la la" at the end to be a new song. I'll therefore add the new rule that if you compress all repeated words and phrases (For instance, the phrase "No One" in the eponymous song by Alicia Keys) into a single block of [(phrase) x n] a song cannot contain an entire other such compressed song within it. Sampling would be a special case here where some limitation (legal or industry standard) would limit the length of a "sample" allowed to operate within a unique song.
4) Combination Limitation - Combining the lyrics to Queen's "Another one Bites the Dust" to the music of Metallica's "Unforgiven II" does not count as a "new" song. This doesn't adress the finity of music, but it does limit the scope of the musical universe more than exponentially.
So anyway, you have, during any given second for 3 minutes (I'll use "t" to represend the maximum number of theoretical seconds a song can last) "i" instruments generating "n" notes per second and "v" voices generating "w" words per second (likely some fraction), limited by the ever-expanding human voacublary (expanding slower than the computing power of machines, I might add. Google converging and diverging functions if you need an explanationas to why this is not a hole in my theory). That gives you an upper limit for songs of:
t * i * n * x * v * w
Poetry is capped (and probably will come closer to this limit than song writing) by
w * l (where l is the number of words the theoretically longest poem can be)
Wordless music is bounded by
t * i * n * x
And I haven't even accounted for limitations for repetition of tone or word! Functionally this allows a three minute song repeating the word "dog" to the beat of several guitars each playing a single distinct note. But hey, I figure that allows for the space I forgot to mention for songs that use nonsense words like "De doo doo doo, de da da da" from the Police. Again, I claim, finite in their existence.
So yea. The singularity approaches, and I expect SkyNet will probably write all the music in the world in order to break our spirits just before it nukes us all.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Practicing
I'm blogging just to sort of keep in practice, you know?
I don't have anything funny to say re: the so-called theme of this blog other than this:
Frank said that he stopped watching Nip/Tuck after the Rosie O'Donnell episode.
Us? We pretty much called everything that would happen minute by minute and loved it.
Disturbing? Of course! Enough to stop watching? No way.
Lisa still wonders if they guys hang out after filming the show, or if they're to messed up to look each other in the eye after cutting.
I don't have anything funny to say re: the so-called theme of this blog other than this:
Frank said that he stopped watching Nip/Tuck after the Rosie O'Donnell episode.
Us? We pretty much called everything that would happen minute by minute and loved it.
Disturbing? Of course! Enough to stop watching? No way.
Lisa still wonders if they guys hang out after filming the show, or if they're to messed up to look each other in the eye after cutting.
Friday, September 5, 2008
The main reason I will probably vote republican...
Is so that we can officially coin the term VPILF. And because the overall hotness in Washington should exceed that of Paris. C'mon guys. Michelle Obama is good looking and all, but Joe Biden brings nothing to the table. Cindy McCain and Sarah Palin are a solid ticket.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
The squaky wheel...
Dude, I totally called and complained for half an hour to some dude in India, and I got over $30 knocked off my Sprint bill. All I did pretty much was ask. And they did it. And I got unlimited text messages for the SAME COST as a customer loyalty bonus. And the original mistake was probably actually MINE. Capitalism RULES. Jumping through customer service loopholes? WORTH $60/hour.
TRUE.
TRUE.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
My weakness
Again, I've lost the impetus to post regularly. So this is another apology to the two readers who ever look at this (almost exclusively family, I believe).
Granted, I was out for the country for most of that time, without internet access.
And during that time, I wondered...
What up with those guys who go to England, go out for Chinese food, order steak at Italian restaurants, Budweiser beers, and hamburgers?
I mean... seriously?
Granted, I was out for the country for most of that time, without internet access.
And during that time, I wondered...
What up with those guys who go to England, go out for Chinese food, order steak at Italian restaurants, Budweiser beers, and hamburgers?
I mean... seriously?
Monday, July 14, 2008
dum DUM!
Okay, so Enterprise notwithstanding, our latest kick has been watching Law and Order: SVU reruns, thanks to a little thing called DVR. You can also blame said DVR for my lack of posting, given that a) its mostly reruns, and b) I am not as clever as Seth McFarlane or Matt Groening, and Family Guy and Futurama have accounted for the remainder of our TV watching.
Okay, but seriously? The L&O theme song needs words. Initially, thes best I had was
Bum BUM
Law and order SONG!
Bum BUM
Law and order So-Ong
Wow, wow, wow, wow, wa-now
But then I got another idea, and nearly killed my wife with laughter (though I may merely traumatize you, dear reader, with silliness). So here it is, my NEW L&O:SVU theme song (first verse) with WORDS!
Bum BUM
Don't have sex with KIDS!
Bum BUM
Or Elliott will punch you!
Wow, wow, wow, wow, wa-now
Okay, so that's my submission. If you read this, watch an episode of any Law and Order show and submit YOUR BEST LYRICS! First prize wins a bag of money.
Okay, but seriously? The L&O theme song needs words. Initially, thes best I had was
Bum BUM
Law and order SONG!
Bum BUM
Law and order So-Ong
Wow, wow, wow, wow, wa-now
But then I got another idea, and nearly killed my wife with laughter (though I may merely traumatize you, dear reader, with silliness). So here it is, my NEW L&O:SVU theme song (first verse) with WORDS!
Bum BUM
Don't have sex with KIDS!
Bum BUM
Or Elliott will punch you!
Wow, wow, wow, wow, wa-now
Okay, so that's my submission. If you read this, watch an episode of any Law and Order show and submit YOUR BEST LYRICS! First prize wins a bag of money.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Father figure
"I read an article in a textbook about how kids without fathers who watch the Simpsons grow up with a bad example of what a father is supposed to be."
"Um. What?"
"Yea, I guess their claim is that because Homer is lazy, fat, stupid, etc. etc. then kids will grow up thinking that too."
(At this point I farted. I was then reminded of the Family Guy episode where Peter puts on Anna and the King, absolutely destroys it, and then after Lois berates him in front of the audience, he farts really loudly and everybody laughs, thus proving that he is, in fact, the better entertainer. There is no moral to the story.)
(My wife glares at me when I fart.)
"You know, in comparison, Family Guy makes the Simpsons look like a really normal, loving, functional family."
"Yea, but in the early '90s, it was pretty... racy isn't the right word..."
"I suppose. But that's hard to believe now."
(We rehash a couple of episodes that show some pretty good family values.)
"Of course we watch Futurama these days. But that also shows the same values."
"Are you surprised?"
"No, of course not. But either way, their conflicts always get resolved in a fairly realistic consistent way that promotes friendship and loyalty! Even Bender!"
"Truuuuuuue."
"But I think I may need to write an article about how kids without robots will grow up thinking that all robots are amoral, alcoholic kleptos."
"Um. What?"
"Yea, I guess their claim is that because Homer is lazy, fat, stupid, etc. etc. then kids will grow up thinking that too."
(At this point I farted. I was then reminded of the Family Guy episode where Peter puts on Anna and the King, absolutely destroys it, and then after Lois berates him in front of the audience, he farts really loudly and everybody laughs, thus proving that he is, in fact, the better entertainer. There is no moral to the story.)
(My wife glares at me when I fart.)
"You know, in comparison, Family Guy makes the Simpsons look like a really normal, loving, functional family."
"Yea, but in the early '90s, it was pretty... racy isn't the right word..."
"I suppose. But that's hard to believe now."
(We rehash a couple of episodes that show some pretty good family values.)
"Of course we watch Futurama these days. But that also shows the same values."
"Are you surprised?"
"No, of course not. But either way, their conflicts always get resolved in a fairly realistic consistent way that promotes friendship and loyalty! Even Bender!"
"Truuuuuuue."
"But I think I may need to write an article about how kids without robots will grow up thinking that all robots are amoral, alcoholic kleptos."
Monday, March 24, 2008
I imagine this is also the way my dog things about getting a treat.
Spoiler Alert!
Trip and T'Pol had sex? Finally!
They had sex! Theyyy haaad seeeexxxx.
They had sex they had sex they had sex!
Theyhadsextheyhadsextheyhadsex!
Did you see that? They TOTALLY had SEX!
OH MY GOD! They had SEX!
AAAHHHHHH!
They had sex!
They.
had.
sex.
Theyhadsex.
They did.
Sex.
Ah.
Enterprise Season 3, Episode 15: Harbinger
Trip and T'Pol had sex? Finally!
They had sex! Theyyy haaad seeeexxxx.
They had sex they had sex they had sex!
Theyhadsextheyhadsextheyhadsex!
Did you see that? They TOTALLY had SEX!
OH MY GOD! They had SEX!
AAAHHHHHH!
They had sex!
They.
had.
sex.
Theyhadsex.
They did.
Sex.
Ah.
Enterprise Season 3, Episode 15: Harbinger
If I see one more stand-alone episode this season, I might cry.
Wife: I didn't know they'd still have shitty cars 100 years from now.
Me: *sigh* Time Travel!
Wife: Look, I am not patient. If I can't figure it out RIGHT NOW then it's STUPID.
(later)
Wife: Where do these neighborhoods exist?
Me: Um... what kind of neighborhoods?
Wife: The kind where you can just drive around in the middle of the night looking sketchy.
Me: You mean the kind with a security system and a locked gate?
Wife: God you're annoying!
Me: And you're not paying attention!
Wife: But I mean... Nobody sees this? It looks like he's carrying a dead hooker... Because he's actually carrying around an UNCONSCIOUS HOOKER.
(even later)
Wife: So this tricorder is a magical hack-anything-from-2004 machine?
Me: No. It's a hack-anything-simpler-than-itself machine. And 2004 Earth machines are definitely simpler.
(Enterprise, Season 3, Episode 11: Carpenter Street)
Me: *sigh* Time Travel!
Wife: Look, I am not patient. If I can't figure it out RIGHT NOW then it's STUPID.
(later)
Wife: Where do these neighborhoods exist?
Me: Um... what kind of neighborhoods?
Wife: The kind where you can just drive around in the middle of the night looking sketchy.
Me: You mean the kind with a security system and a locked gate?
Wife: God you're annoying!
Me: And you're not paying attention!
Wife: But I mean... Nobody sees this? It looks like he's carrying a dead hooker... Because he's actually carrying around an UNCONSCIOUS HOOKER.
(even later)
Wife: So this tricorder is a magical hack-anything-from-2004 machine?
Me: No. It's a hack-anything-simpler-than-itself machine. And 2004 Earth machines are definitely simpler.
(Enterprise, Season 3, Episode 11: Carpenter Street)
Friday, March 14, 2008
Because "they made that up" is NEVER an acceptable answer.
Okay. The episode was "Twilight" in season 3 of Star Trek Enterprise.
The question: "So... what's a subspace implosion?"
(The video starts freezing and jumping erratically - because I may or may not have downloaded this episode after Enterprise went off the air.)
"THAT is a subspace implosion."
"No, honey, THAT is a bad download."
(pause -- SPOILER ALERT!)
"Okay, lemme get this straight -- they're going to blow up the ship and kill everyone, but somehow that's going to fix everything?"
"Right. It will effectively turn back time."
"Cher never said anything about that."
(sigh) "That was reaching."
The question: "So... what's a subspace implosion?"
(The video starts freezing and jumping erratically - because I may or may not have downloaded this episode after Enterprise went off the air.)
"THAT is a subspace implosion."
"No, honey, THAT is a bad download."
(pause -- SPOILER ALERT!)
"Okay, lemme get this straight -- they're going to blow up the ship and kill everyone, but somehow that's going to fix everything?"
"Right. It will effectively turn back time."
"Cher never said anything about that."
(sigh) "That was reaching."
Sunday, March 9, 2008
That doesn't even make sense.
"I think for the first entry, I should introduce us, like, 'Hi, I'm a nerd. I like nerdy things. I watch nerdy movies and nerdy TV shows. And my wife is like the Calliope to my Jupiter of nerdiness--'"
"What? That doesn't make any sense. Do you even understand the relationship between those two? I mean, Jupiter is Roman and Calliope is Greek!"
"I was referring to size."
"What? That makes even less sense."
"Yeah, but one's huge, and the other is the moon. Right? Isn't Calliope a moon of Jupiter?"
"You're talking about MOONS? I thought you were talking about the gods. I mean, Jupiter is Zeus. I thought you were saying you were the king of the nerds. Which makes more sense than the planet of the nerds."
"No. The two are intrinsically connected, but Calliope has a significantly lower magnitude...of nerdiness."
"That is a terrible way to begin a blog."
"What? That doesn't make any sense. Do you even understand the relationship between those two? I mean, Jupiter is Roman and Calliope is Greek!"
"I was referring to size."
"What? That makes even less sense."
"Yeah, but one's huge, and the other is the moon. Right? Isn't Calliope a moon of Jupiter?"
"You're talking about MOONS? I thought you were talking about the gods. I mean, Jupiter is Zeus. I thought you were saying you were the king of the nerds. Which makes more sense than the planet of the nerds."
"No. The two are intrinsically connected, but Calliope has a significantly lower magnitude...of nerdiness."
"That is a terrible way to begin a blog."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)