I'm getting really tired of privacy issues on the internet. Being in a position where I may one day be working with minors I hear a great deal of conflicting instructions, but the one I am going to talk about is the issue of being somebody.
We talk a lot in the Education Department about being a person, being relatable, being careful, being conservative, being experimental, being professional, being ourselves, and so on. So, where does that put me? Am I supposed to be careful of every little thing that I post on the internet? I haven't got any posts of illegal drug use, pornography, hate crimes (at least I don't think my "People I Hate" segments are considered hate crimes) or illegal activity (someone took down the picture of us walking left out of a parking lot that had a Right Turn Only sign), so what's the big deal? Sure, I drink and I swear and I make the occasional wild accusation, but the people that don't do that kind of stuff are the people who hide the fact that they do. So, should I join the conservatives and the cowards and try and erase my existence on the internet? I have two problems with that.
1) I'm not that good at the internet. It'd be like trying to clean up an oil spill with my bare hands.
2) Fuck that!
Why should I spend the time and effort to make myself digitally invisible? Why should the only information be an e-portfolio? Should I make all of my friends and colleagues sign confidentiality agreements before I act like myself? If we're going to let our potential employers dictate how we act, then we let them dictate who we are. And if we all tried to present ourselves as hard working, innovative, creative, involved cardboard cutouts, then future employers will just have to dig deeper to find out who you really are.
Many of you may already know my opinions on public and even private surveillance, but for those of you who don't, here's the truth: we all do things we wouldn't want other people to see. We all do things that we think separate us from everyone else. But, when everyone is doing something wrong, who's to say that it is wrong? If we were all seen as ourselves, then all the 'unacceptable' things that we do would be entirely normal.
So wouldn't it be great if we all let ourselves be who we are? What are our future employers going to do? Not hire anyone? The problem is, "I am Sparticus" doesn't work in this case when some people don't participate. Those people are fake. But maybe that's what you have to do to play the game.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Discrimiantion
I don't know if I've already gone off about this before or not, but I'm going to go off on it again!
They say you can't judge a book by its cover, and with this I mostly agree. More accurately, this phrase should be "you can't judge a book by it's cover material." Because let's face it, if you picked up a black leather-bound book that read "Titwick and the Garden of Feelinghood" you would be more than inclined to have a peek and almost guaranteed not to buy that book. Just the same, if there was a nice hardcover titled "Your Inner Tiger" you would ignore the book altogether for being lame. And we all know some of the cheap old paperbacks are where the good shit is at (and yes, a substantial amount of garbage). This is the metaphor for opposing racism and sexism and other visual-isms. They say not to be discriminatory.
But discrimination is key to our very survival. We discriminate against panthers for being ferocious, but we like kitties. We discriminate against rapists, but love lovers. Yes, there is a big fucking difference, thanks for pointing that out. There is also a difference between cool people and douchewads. So, while you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover [material] (but, hey, you can do whatever the fuck you want), you can judge a book by it's preface. If you hate a book by the preface, you are entitled to put that book down and say "that was dumb". If a jerk is a jerk, you call them a jerk. I don't care if they're black or a girl or handicapped or poor or what. Jerks are jerks. If they're going to be jerks then don't tell people they're okay. They don't to be given your chance. They've been given chances not to be jerks to thousands of people. They need to just stop being jerks.
They say you can't judge a book by its cover, and with this I mostly agree. More accurately, this phrase should be "you can't judge a book by it's cover material." Because let's face it, if you picked up a black leather-bound book that read "Titwick and the Garden of Feelinghood" you would be more than inclined to have a peek and almost guaranteed not to buy that book. Just the same, if there was a nice hardcover titled "Your Inner Tiger" you would ignore the book altogether for being lame. And we all know some of the cheap old paperbacks are where the good shit is at (and yes, a substantial amount of garbage). This is the metaphor for opposing racism and sexism and other visual-isms. They say not to be discriminatory.
But discrimination is key to our very survival. We discriminate against panthers for being ferocious, but we like kitties. We discriminate against rapists, but love lovers. Yes, there is a big fucking difference, thanks for pointing that out. There is also a difference between cool people and douchewads. So, while you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover [material] (but, hey, you can do whatever the fuck you want), you can judge a book by it's preface. If you hate a book by the preface, you are entitled to put that book down and say "that was dumb". If a jerk is a jerk, you call them a jerk. I don't care if they're black or a girl or handicapped or poor or what. Jerks are jerks. If they're going to be jerks then don't tell people they're okay. They don't to be given your chance. They've been given chances not to be jerks to thousands of people. They need to just stop being jerks.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Efficiency
So, I'm taking my Bachelor's of Education and at the lecture our prof is talking about efficiency and how it was the biggest thing in the Industrial Revolution. It was so big, in fact, that the concept of efficiency flooded all aspects of life, including how teachers teach their students. Given this comparison, our class was outraged. How can people treat children as if they are machines to be made?
The simple fact is that we don't. The word "efficiency" has been demonized in our heads. We immediately understand "efficient" as being inhumane and wrong. I find it funny/sad how so many degree holding people can be so reactionary. They're probably all Slap Chop owners, too, not to mention the storage rooms full of Oxy Clean (even I felt Billy Mays had more authority than most professors).
O, what a glorious world we now live in now that we are enlightened! No longer are we subjects of the evil system of efficiency, nor must we suffer the anguish of mustard stains!
The problem is that efficiency is not a bad thing. It's a concept. Concepts are never entirely bad.
What about fascism? Hey, I'm all for democracy of sorts, but wouldn't you agree that being a fascist when it comes to something like flushing after you shit that fascism is a good thing? Shouldn't we all be shit-flush fascists? Say that five times fast.
Efficiency is no different. Yes, we should not treat children like brain jars that we need to pour knowledge into as quickly as possible. But that is assuming the formula for educational efficiency is curriculum covered/curriculum available, or even just proportional to the students' final grades (answers correct/total questions asked). No one seems to be capable of imagining the formula {[sum of the change of lifelong knowledge (learning)/number of children]/time}, or, to put another way, how much learning you can evoke in how little time.
Let me give you an example. Most people in my program take the concept of efficiency and disregard it as evil, suggesting instead "quality of quantity." Now, imagine yourself in a class of 30 students. A teacher could certainly take the time to teach each child in the classroom the lesson of the day in a unique style that would cater exactly to that student's learning style. Who can argue that this would not yield a greater quality of education? But, as anyone can plainly see, this strategy of teaching each individual child on their own is ___________.
If you said "stupid" I have to agree with you, but you're not quite there yet. If you said, "tha gr8est idea evar!!!1!!" I have to ask you to politely go fuck yourself (and yes, there are seriously people like that). If you said "inefficient" well then I guess I've made my point.
If you're still unclear about something I've covered in today's blog, please, come see me after class.
The simple fact is that we don't. The word "efficiency" has been demonized in our heads. We immediately understand "efficient" as being inhumane and wrong. I find it funny/sad how so many degree holding people can be so reactionary. They're probably all Slap Chop owners, too, not to mention the storage rooms full of Oxy Clean (even I felt Billy Mays had more authority than most professors).
O, what a glorious world we now live in now that we are enlightened! No longer are we subjects of the evil system of efficiency, nor must we suffer the anguish of mustard stains!
The problem is that efficiency is not a bad thing. It's a concept. Concepts are never entirely bad.
What about fascism? Hey, I'm all for democracy of sorts, but wouldn't you agree that being a fascist when it comes to something like flushing after you shit that fascism is a good thing? Shouldn't we all be shit-flush fascists? Say that five times fast.
Efficiency is no different. Yes, we should not treat children like brain jars that we need to pour knowledge into as quickly as possible. But that is assuming the formula for educational efficiency is curriculum covered/curriculum available, or even just proportional to the students' final grades (answers correct/total questions asked). No one seems to be capable of imagining the formula {[sum of the change of lifelong knowledge (learning)/number of children]/time}, or, to put another way, how much learning you can evoke in how little time.
Let me give you an example. Most people in my program take the concept of efficiency and disregard it as evil, suggesting instead "quality of quantity." Now, imagine yourself in a class of 30 students. A teacher could certainly take the time to teach each child in the classroom the lesson of the day in a unique style that would cater exactly to that student's learning style. Who can argue that this would not yield a greater quality of education? But, as anyone can plainly see, this strategy of teaching each individual child on their own is ___________.
If you said "stupid" I have to agree with you, but you're not quite there yet. If you said, "tha gr8est idea evar!!!1!!" I have to ask you to politely go fuck yourself (and yes, there are seriously people like that). If you said "inefficient" well then I guess I've made my point.
If you're still unclear about something I've covered in today's blog, please, come see me after class.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
People I Hate Part 10
Hipsters.
I hate hipsters so much that it puts World War 2 into a whole new perspective. Just replace "Jew" with "Hipster" and I'm pretty much on board.
The real problem is, it's only going to get worse. We're losing the war here, cool 90's kids. Kids these days just don't understand that no amount of consumer whoring (and yes, when you only buy organic foods and fair trade coffee, you're still a consumer whore since a. those are niche markets that exist because hipsters are willing to pay through the nose for the social stigma and b. you still wear $300 of trendy brand name clothes) is going to make you an awesome person. You've gotta be awesome all on your own. That's what makes a timeless good dude.
My message to the kids today is this: The funkiest disco king is now your orthodontist.
I hate hipsters so much that it puts World War 2 into a whole new perspective. Just replace "Jew" with "Hipster" and I'm pretty much on board.
The real problem is, it's only going to get worse. We're losing the war here, cool 90's kids. Kids these days just don't understand that no amount of consumer whoring (and yes, when you only buy organic foods and fair trade coffee, you're still a consumer whore since a. those are niche markets that exist because hipsters are willing to pay through the nose for the social stigma and b. you still wear $300 of trendy brand name clothes) is going to make you an awesome person. You've gotta be awesome all on your own. That's what makes a timeless good dude.
My message to the kids today is this: The funkiest disco king is now your orthodontist.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Family Guy
So, I'm watching Family Guy the other day and I came to the conclusion that the show only contains one joke.
"Hey, you know when someone does something and the moment lasts for a short time?"
"Yeah."
"What if that happened for an unusually long period of time?"
"Ha ha ha!"
"- ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha-"
"Okay, Seth, I get it."
"- ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha-"
"No, really, shut the fuck up."
"-ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha-"
Wait for it.
"-ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-"
Keep waiting.
"-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh-"
You can see where I'm going with this.
"-hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.... "
If you're laughing, punch yourself in the face right now for me.
Thank you.
That is the formula for the majority of the "comedy" air-time on that show. This includes those exchanges between characters where they both stutter and interrupt one another in an awkward denouement to a conversation. This interestingly parallels the show. The joke is analogous to the show itself. They take a concept that is amusing at first and extend it to a point where it is even funnier. Then they take it to a point where it is no longer funny. Then to a point where it is annoying. Then to a point where it is frustrating. Then to a point where it is - Look at me, I could write for the fucking show.
Think back to when your read the sample conversation I wrote earlier. You didn't read each one of those "ha's". You skimmed the first line, maybe, and the second line you got the fucking point. The third line you just assumed. It's the same as the joke. There is no punchline.
If comedy is like getting your ass kicked by comedy, Family Guy misses the mark. Comedy fights in many ways. British comedies fight like old-timey boxers; sometimes lots of quick and subtle jabs, definitely lots of footwork to set you up, and it both takes itself seriously and is just plain silly at the same time. Primetime comedies are like modern boxing matches; they hit harder, but don't set you up as well (it also can result in hugging). Most of your late-night comedies are like kick-boxing; a fast paced version for boxing that hits you where you don't see it coming. Your average sit-com is like a WWE wrestling match; the whole things is pre-planned, formulaic, and entirely staged. Family Guy is like being smothered with a greasy pig carcass.
But America loves it.
"Hey, you know when someone does something and the moment lasts for a short time?"
"Yeah."
"What if that happened for an unusually long period of time?"
"Ha ha ha!"
"- ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha-"
"Okay, Seth, I get it."
"- ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha-"
"No, really, shut the fuck up."
"-ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha-"
Wait for it.
"-ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-"
Keep waiting.
"-aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh-"
You can see where I'm going with this.
"-hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.... "
If you're laughing, punch yourself in the face right now for me.
Thank you.
That is the formula for the majority of the "comedy" air-time on that show. This includes those exchanges between characters where they both stutter and interrupt one another in an awkward denouement to a conversation. This interestingly parallels the show. The joke is analogous to the show itself. They take a concept that is amusing at first and extend it to a point where it is even funnier. Then they take it to a point where it is no longer funny. Then to a point where it is annoying. Then to a point where it is frustrating. Then to a point where it is - Look at me, I could write for the fucking show.
Think back to when your read the sample conversation I wrote earlier. You didn't read each one of those "ha's". You skimmed the first line, maybe, and the second line you got the fucking point. The third line you just assumed. It's the same as the joke. There is no punchline.
If comedy is like getting your ass kicked by comedy, Family Guy misses the mark. Comedy fights in many ways. British comedies fight like old-timey boxers; sometimes lots of quick and subtle jabs, definitely lots of footwork to set you up, and it both takes itself seriously and is just plain silly at the same time. Primetime comedies are like modern boxing matches; they hit harder, but don't set you up as well (it also can result in hugging). Most of your late-night comedies are like kick-boxing; a fast paced version for boxing that hits you where you don't see it coming. Your average sit-com is like a WWE wrestling match; the whole things is pre-planned, formulaic, and entirely staged. Family Guy is like being smothered with a greasy pig carcass.
But America loves it.
Friday, July 30, 2010
People I Hate Part 9
Askholes.
People who ask questions over and over. Why do they always come into my store?
"This bottle? Is it sweet?"
"Yes, it will be a bit sweeter?"
"It's sweet?"
"Yes."
"Sveit!?"
Yes, it's fucking sweet! Jesus H. On a related note, at what point do Eastern Europeans go from being a rather attractive people to people you can't fucking stand? Is there any transitional period, or do they just all of a sudden go from good-looking party-goers to arrogant old people? Maybe cool Eastern Europeans are a new breed and we just have to wait for all the jerks to die off before we get cool old Eastern Europeans.
In fact, I think old people in general are just irritating. Most askholes are old people.
"7.99?"
"7.99."
"It's 7.99?"
"7.99."
"Yes."
"How about this one?" picking up the the same label.
"It's also 7.99." pointing at the sign.
"They're both 7.99."
"Which one is better?"
"Well, it depends what kind you like."
"Okay."
Pause.
"7.99."
"Which one you drink?"
"The shiraz."
"Iz bettir?"
"Yes! Fuck!"
I don't actually say this, and in no way endorse shiraz over any other variety of wine, but that's pretty much how these conversations go. Also, yes, as my anger increases, this couple becomes more and more Eastern European.
People who ask questions over and over. Why do they always come into my store?
"This bottle? Is it sweet?"
"Yes, it will be a bit sweeter?"
"It's sweet?"
"Yes."
"Sveit!?"
Yes, it's fucking sweet! Jesus H. On a related note, at what point do Eastern Europeans go from being a rather attractive people to people you can't fucking stand? Is there any transitional period, or do they just all of a sudden go from good-looking party-goers to arrogant old people? Maybe cool Eastern Europeans are a new breed and we just have to wait for all the jerks to die off before we get cool old Eastern Europeans.
In fact, I think old people in general are just irritating. Most askholes are old people.
"7.99?"
"7.99."
"It's 7.99?"
"7.99."
"Yes."
"How about this one?" picking up the the same label.
"It's also 7.99." pointing at the sign.
"They're both 7.99."
"Which one is better?"
"Well, it depends what kind you like."
"Okay."
Pause.
"7.99."
"Which one you drink?"
"The shiraz."
"Iz bettir?"
"Yes! Fuck!"
I don't actually say this, and in no way endorse shiraz over any other variety of wine, but that's pretty much how these conversations go. Also, yes, as my anger increases, this couple becomes more and more Eastern European.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
A limited access to the internet
I would blog more if I could blog from anywhere. It seems like 140 characters is too short for a complex thought, but sometimes I have complex thoughts while I'm at work (sometimes). I think it feels weird to write a blog post on a piece of paper and then transcribe it to the internet later. It kind of loses the point of what most blogs are about: venting on the internet.
I don't think I'm alone on this, but I feel like the future isn't coming fast enough. There hasn't been a scientific development where our generation has been able to say "no fucking way!" Maybe we're spoilt, and when something comes up like a touch screen handheld media player that can access an entire world of information from satellites we only think "hey, neat" or "if I don't have that I will be unpopular." Sometimes, I'll admit, we can really sit down and be wowed by the world we live in, but for the most part, where the fuck is my reliable voice-to-text app that will let me remotely update my blog from my lunchtime musings? Or a printer that can withstand more than the movement of it's own printer head without breaking, for that matter.
I don't think I'm alone on this, but I feel like the future isn't coming fast enough. There hasn't been a scientific development where our generation has been able to say "no fucking way!" Maybe we're spoilt, and when something comes up like a touch screen handheld media player that can access an entire world of information from satellites we only think "hey, neat" or "if I don't have that I will be unpopular." Sometimes, I'll admit, we can really sit down and be wowed by the world we live in, but for the most part, where the fuck is my reliable voice-to-text app that will let me remotely update my blog from my lunchtime musings? Or a printer that can withstand more than the movement of it's own printer head without breaking, for that matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
